Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Toys Hardware

Sony Claims First Running Humanoid Robot 496

Posted by michael from the jump-for-joy dept.
News for nerds writes "Sony Corporation announced the new development of Sony's humanoid robot, enabling integrated motion control for walking, jumping and running on feet. By applying this technology Sony has created the world's first running humanoid robot 'QRIO'. Japanese PC watch has an article with pictures and movies of QRIO running at 14 meters per minute, sometimes with both feet leaving the floor (= running)."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sony Claims First Running Humanoid Robot More

Sony Claims First Running Humanoid Robot

Comments Filter:

  • boring... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:30AM (#7753186)
    wake me up when they create a robot that can breakdance! now that would be cool...

    • Actually, it already can (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Qrios are really neat. Running is far from the coolest thing they can be programmed to do.

      Two Qrios have had a sumo wrestling match before, complete with ceremonies.

    • Re:boring... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by line.at.infinity ( 707997 )
      Not necessarily breakdancing, but they're dancing here (wmv) [impress.co.jp]. Extra points for figuring out what genre of music they're dancing to.

      They're so cute! ...And small. Much better than the Honda robots.

  • Calling Bill Joy (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ObviousGuy ( 578567 ) <ObviousGuy@hotmail.com> on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:30AM (#7753189) Homepage Journal
    As we make these machines bigger and better and more like ourselves, shouldn't we also consider the possibility that they will at some point have to be assigned rights just as animals and even humans have rights?

    There was a film with Robin Williams in it wherein a robot in fact reached sentience and it wasn't until after the robot's death that it was granted personhood and all the rights and privileges thereby.

    Should we consider these creations of ours, no matter how sophisticated and intelligent nothing more than machines?
    • May i correct you, it was not a "Robin Williams Movie", it was an Isaac Asimov book.
      And, yes, The book was as bad as the movie . )

    • Re:Calling Bill Joy (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Clinoti ( 696723 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:35AM (#7753223)
      Lets not go overboard here, women in some countries still do not have the right to vote or have basic human rights.

      The uproar from giving those same rights to animate/inanimate objects before humans opens the door to so many arguments it's not even funny.

      Of course the preceeding statement is contradicted by the fact that seemingly every conglomerate seems to have rights....

      • Re:Calling Bill Joy (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Tim C ( 15259 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:43AM (#7753293)
        Lets not go overboard here, women in some countries still do not have the right to vote or have basic human rights.

        If we are ever able to create a truly self-aware machine, the fact that humans in other countries are denied basic rights would be no reason at all to deny that intelligence those same rights.

        After all, those countries have their reasons (though we, of course, consider them to be wrong); are you seriously saying that we should do the same, just because we have our reasons too? How would denying our creations rights improve the situation for those humans? If anything, it would strengthen the countries' positions, giving them something to point at - "Look, you've created an intelligence and are doing to it what you accuse us of doing. How can you possibly expect us to not do something that you're doing yourselves?"
        • Self aware machines with the right to vote? Sweet, so all I'll have to do is to build myself an army of voters and I can become the next US president... Vote for me: Free midsection sensory upgrades for all. And I can just see the spam: Instantly add on inches - heavy duty bolt on vibrating upgrades that will please any woman. Gozo self sealing hydraulic oil - maximum pressure all night guaranteed! 3 out of 4 females prefer their dates to use Energizer batteries.
    • Well sure when we get AI to the point of self awareness, that however is decades, maybe even centuries off.
      We will have robots that run, jump, look like human beings long before any self awareness is achieved. And no they won't need to have rights, just because they will act and look human will mean nothing.

    • Re:Not Bill Joy... (Score:5, Informative)

      by CommandNotFound ( 571326 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:40AM (#7753266)
      ...I think you mean Call Isaac Asimov, who wrote _The Bicentennial Man_ upon which that movie was based. Asimov probably inspired a lot of roboticists and tackled a lot of these human/robot ethical delimas in his fiction, including the controversial Three Laws of Robotics, which I'll repeat here for completeness (if you don't know these, you should go to the library and read some Asimov. _I, Robot_, is a good start; it's a collection of his short stories about robots.

      Three Laws of Robotics:
      1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
      2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
      3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

      • Re:Not Bill Joy... (Score:3, Informative)

        by spongman ( 182339 )
        Not forgetting, of course:
        0. A robot may not injure humanity or, through inaction, allow humanity to come to harm [1].
        with the 1st law being appropriately modified.

        [1] Robots And Empire (ch. 63)

      • I don't think such laws are an actual useful idea when making a robot. They're an awful hack. Rather build a robot that contains the actual reasons why he wouldn't want to do such things...

        Those rules are great plot devices. I don't believe that Asimov meant them to be more than that.

    • Re:Calling Bill Joy (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jridley ( 9305 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:42AM (#7753281)
      Sure, when we start getting towards sentience. Anything that is self-aware and capable of higher level communications should be granted some level of rights. The rights of a sentient creature should not be based on whether they think with water and carbon, or silicon, or whether they have testicles or a certain skin color.

      But this is just a clever toy. It's no more aware of itself than Eliza is. They aren't even TRYING to go for AI, just fun toys.

      The first AI (if/when) will probably NOT be in a robot; it'll be too large to be mobile, perhaps it'll even be a distributed supercomputer. Nevertheless, it also should be granted rights. Even if that day ever comes, it'll still probably be a long time, if ever, that the machinery necessary would be small enough to put inside a humanoid robot. I could see a humanoid robot being under the control of a machine intelligence via remote link, if the link is clever enough, it might even feel the body as it's "self."
      • No, it can walk *and run* on 2 legs! Therefore, this robot is *almost human* and is entitled to the same rights as humans.

        I can't believe that this topic was even brought up. Sigh.

      • On Sentience and Rights (Score:4, Insightful)

        by ThosLives ( 686517 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @10:57AM (#7753905) Journal
        This brings up many many questions and thoughts, but here's the one on which I will focus today:

        What necessitates the need for granting of rights? Is it sentience? Or is it something else? I would posit that no matter what level of human mimicry our technology allows, it will at best be a mimicry. Why?

        It is my belief that there is this thing called a "soul" which is the defining thing between humans and all other sentient life on earth. (There are arguments for other animals, such as dogs, dolphins, cats, etc. to have a soul, or not, but I won't go into that one for now). Considering we don't know what a soul is, how to measure it, whatever, then how can we say that a machine would have this? If we turn off a machine, it is turned off. What happens when you restart it? It comes back on (assuming it's not broken). Is it wrong to smash a (soulless) piece of machinery (considering you own it, destroying won't damage anyone, etc. etc.)? Why would a machine with "AI" be any different than a car? Just because it says "ow" when its sensors say that it is being damaged, and it starts to avoid being damaged, what is that? Single-celled organisms do that. Humans do that. But is that what makes humans special? Why is it OK for lions to kill other animals for food, but we get mad when lions kill humans? Why do we get mad when humans kill other animals for food? The troubling thing is this: the outcome of "sentient" AI will either mean that humans are simply machines as well and our laws and moral structure is simply hubris, and there is no real reason to preserve life at all, or there really is something more to humanity then the chemical mechanics of the body. There are only those two possibilities, and there isn't much grey area as far as I see it. One is full of despair, the other awe and wonder.

        Mankind must come to first understand what it is that makes him different, and why, before he even thinks about granting "rights" to man's creations. After all, what is a "right" anyway but an agreement between the people with the bigger weapons to let you do something? For that is all a "right" really is in this world. Sure, that's kind of a cynical view, but it's the truth.

        This is a bit off-topic, perhaps, but I posit the only "right" we have is the right to make choices. We can choose to do anything, but we must do so knowing that there are consequences. True rights cannot be taken away, and nobody can take away the ability for us to make decisions. Why? Because decisions can be made in the absence of anything else. Sure, we may be prevented from acting on our decisions, but nobody can take away the ability to make them. Sure, they can give us a lobotomy, but then what is left? (This is a possible hole in this idea that even decision-making is a right).

        So, when it comes down to it, if we build robots, and start giving them priviledges (i.e., we won't shut them off for certain things and will punish others for doing so), then we have to understand what the consequences of this choice may be. And there's the old Law of Unintended Consequences to think about.... for every outcome you can forsee, there are usually (at least) two more you don't.

        What I think bugs me most about this article, though, is that I want to know where I can get a job making cool robots like that!

    • Should we consider these creations of ours, no matter how sophisticated and intelligent nothing more than machines?

      Just because it looks humanoid does not mean that it too has sentience. It's a piece of hardware that carries out mathmatical formulas to emulate human movement. A marvelous achievement to say the least. I would even say it is a beautiful piece of art. But let's not get the cart before the horse.

      When we actually have created synthetic sentience, then and only then we need to start wonderin

      • These are mechanical puppets... and God knows I want one! I'm going to start stealing old people's prescriptions so I can lure one to me!

        That's an evil plot! Exploiting robots weakness for old people's prescriptions like that!

    • Re:movies (Score:5, Funny)

      by jest3r ( 458429 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:49AM (#7753340)
      If you look really close you can see Kenny Baker's [imdb.com] face behind the translucent visor.

    • That was Isaac Asimov's idea, and very likely will happen one day. I don't have a problem with that. It's possible to see robots as our extended phenotype [world-of-dawkins.com]. I think they're very likely to be better at sentience than we are.

    • I think a much more interesting and important question is, if a non-Japanese company ever builds a humanoid robot, will it still look like Ultraman?

  • Get with the times, Sony (Score:5, Funny)

    by .c ( 115916 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:31AM (#7753192)
    Wake me up when their humanoid robot looks like a little blond boy. I mean, who'd adopt a white boxy monster named QRIO (Queerio?)
  • In other news, Pau Finashiwu was picked up by the local PD after an incident where he started a fight with top Sony CEO after learning he didn't get the part of wearing the new SONY QRIO body suit.

    All those years of listening to Mr. Robato meant nothing now.

  • What should they call it? (Score:3)

    by Raul654 ( 453029 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:31AM (#7753194) Homepage
    I think they should name it R. Daneel Olivaw [wikipedia.org] the first :)

  • Let's just hope (Score:5, Funny)

    by CompWerks ( 684874 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:31AM (#7753196)

    It doesn't run for Governor of Kalifornia!

  • Babelfish translation.. (Score:5, Informative)

    by rale, the ( 659351 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:32AM (#7753202)
    here [altavista.com]
    - rale
    • And how is that supposed to help anyone?

      SONY on the 18th, holding the new technical concert of 2 foot walking robot in for reporting. Among these, to with new QRIO which evolved was announced "the robot which it runs" from former 2 foot walking.


      You WHAT!?
    • "At the meeting place demonstration of various travelling and jump was done"

      And later, all the base was belong to them.
    • Now will someone translate the Babelfish translation please?

      The same straw raincoat dance announces to end. The latest dance the swing attaching has become new, but QRIO which had the Japanese fan, releases the hand from the Japanese fan in the middle of dancing and the good point that is added it appeals grip function.

      It obviously needs to be ran through Babelfish a couple more times...

      It announces the dance of the raincoat of the same straw in order to end. The hand which is released to QRIO where r

  • The military should purchase this technology... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by vudufixit ( 581911 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:34AM (#7753210)
    Why? Give the robots a Kevlar skin, then load up soldiers' and Marines' rifles with training rounds. Then set the robots running around a mock battlefield to give our guys more realistic practice. We have the best hi-tech bombs and missiles in the world, but it's still boots on the ground that bring a war to conclusion.

    • Re:The military should purchase this technology... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by cloudless.net ( 629916 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:39AM (#7753265) Homepage
      better yet... make these robots pretend to be real soldiers, attract the enemy's to shot them. This way the enemies could be located more easily without causing human life.
      • This way the enemies could be located more easily without causing human life.

        Are the enemies impregnators? We'll end up sending terminators against impregnators... sounds like a good film title "Terminator vs Impregnator"

        Or else you could see this as some kind of enemy whorehouse tracking? Gotta keep dem arabs out of dem harams, dammit!

    • These things are lightyears away from providing useful military training. They would not behave like real soldiers in any way, shape or form. In fact, our soldiers would probably end up the worse for the training.

      Further, they probably run $100K each and would get shredded in seconds by any actual contact with modern weaponry.


    • Give the robots a Kevlar skin, then load up soldiers' and Marines' rifles with training rounds. Then set the robots running around a mock battlefield to give our guys more realistic practice.

      Robots with assault rifles and blanks:
      Cost: $$$$$$$
      Battery life: 20 minutes
      Be able to tactically think or move like a human? No.
      Robots have more moving parts to break then people or paintball guns, hence more maintinence.

      Divide your marines into two teams. Use either laser tag rig or paintball guns.
      Cost: $

  • The robot's first words... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Channard ( 693317 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:34AM (#7753211) Journal
    ...were reportedly.. 'Do you have stairs in your house?' Be afraid. Be very afraid.

  • It RUNS but (Score:5, Funny)

    by Guiri ( 522079 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:34AM (#7753215) Homepage
    does it run Linux?

  • Distance (Score:4, Interesting)

    by superdan2k ( 135614 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:34AM (#7753217) Homepage Journal
    Since when is 14 meters per minute considered "running"? Christ, even a grossly out-of-shape human can cover that distance in a few seconds. Bad translation of the Japanese? Should we factor scale into it? Did I miss something?

    • Re:Distance (Score:5, Insightful)

      by gl4ss ( 559668 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:41AM (#7753275) Homepage Journal
      yes you did.

      you can walk pretty fast too, i'd imagine a robot being able to 'walk' incredibly fast were it developed so.

      you missed the part that roughly said "both legs leaving the floor".

      for really ridiculous on-the-line judging go see some competition walkers(that can walk really fucking fast and get disqualified if they're detected running too much) sport events.

    • Re:Distance (Score:5, Informative)

      by cyberlync ( 450786 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:43AM (#7753286)
      This robot is also about a foot tall. If we scale the robot up it would be something like 84 meters per minute. Of course, thats assuming scaling works and it can be scaled. Also I havn't taken into account any other factors. Someone who actually knows about bio(robo?)mechanics may actually want to chime in here.
      • That's still not running...that's a fast walk with both feet leaving the ground occasionally. Olympics cover 84 meters in a bit less than 8.4 seconds (10 seconds/100 meters), I can cover it in probably 30-50% more than that, being in good shape. So let's call QRIO capable of "jogging", then -- it can't outrun Joe Average, but it can outrun someone who's morbidly obese.

      • Scaling (Score:3, Funny)

        by Baron_Yam ( 643147 )

        To hell with scaling THIS robot up... I want to use this tech scaled up to build a mech. Really, how cool would it be to drive a freakin' MECH to work?

        Boy, it'd be cool to let loose with an autocannon and a brace of SRMs when some idiot cuts you off...

        OK, I'm done with my geeky fantasy for the moment. Thanks for reading. :)

    • It's all about the 'running' stuf. When you run, both of your feet momentarily don't touch the ground. Humans do it w/o problems, robots not. That's the breakthrough. Speed will come later, but it's mainly a breakthrough in complex movement-patterns that's been achieved here.

  • Why run (Score:3, Interesting)

    by edwilli ( 197728 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:39AM (#7753256) Homepage
    It seems to me that wheels are faster than legs anyway. What is the obsession with getting robots to look and do things like humans.

    • Re:Why run (Score:4, Interesting)

      by rokzy ( 687636 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:42AM (#7753282)
      to create others in your own image, to be God

    • Because legs are all terrain (Score:5, Insightful)

      by XNuke ( 5231 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:48AM (#7753332)
      Try getting a wheeled vehicle to go everyplace you can go. Upstairs, climb a ladder, move in any direction from a dead stop. Wheel are great if you want to go fast, but legs are better if you want moderate speed and maneuverability.

      Ask someone in a wheel chair what they think of wheels instead of legs.
      • Agreed that legs are better than wheels. But are 2 legs better than 4 or 6? It seems to me that a quadruped is more stable and can run faster too. The current advantage we have over animals is that we use 2 of our 4 limbs for manipulating objects. But a robot can be easily fitted with 4 legs and 2 or 4 arms. In other words, it's better to make a robot that doesn't necessarily look humanoid.
        • A four legged robot will have a harder time going all the places a human can go because the things humans design are designed for humans. Wow, what a convoluted sentence. The shape of body you're going to have for a four legged robot is going to be a liability when trying to climb a ladder, for instance, and even when going up stairs it's going to be a liability. Try getting a four legged robot to go up the stairs into the attic. Of course, using current technology any robot as big as a person, shaped like
    • Something nobody has mentioned in this thread yet, about legs vs. wheels, is that we are trying to integrate robots into our lifestyles, as "assistants", primarily, and to do that, they should at least be unobtrusive. This means modeling humans to a certain degree.

      Would you prefer to see a humanoid-looking "Maid Bot v1.0" in your kitchen answering the phone, cooking dinner, and doing dishes, or a 6-legged, 4-armed tetrapod? I would prefer the former, though the latter may have more capabilities.

      In short,

  • Prosthetics for amputees (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AndrewCox ( 180128 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:39AM (#7753258)
    I was just watching some news program (60 Minutes, 20/20 or the like) about recent Iraqi war veterans that have lost limbs in combat. Since their medical expenses are covered by the government, they were being fitted with the best prosthetics available (containing micro-processors that make adjustments based on the user's movements).

    What surprised me was that although the legs did seem to work fairly well for walking, there's still a lot of room for improvement (climbing stairs was very difficult and running was out of the question). Advancements in robotics like this could be a great step forward for prosthetic limbs.

    How soon before robotic limbs become so efficient that people are voluntarily amputating their legs for the better robotic counterparts?
    • How soon before robotic limbs become so efficient that people are voluntarily amputating their legs for the better robotic counterparts?

      A long time, I hope. Maybe society will separate into those who have been augmented and those who haven't. Imagine an entirely augmented military (and yes, I know the inital poster was talking about robot legs for vets, not serving soldiers) that could be knocked out by an EMP pulse.

    • "How soon before robotic limbs become so efficient that people are voluntarily amputating their legs for the better robotic counterparts?"

      It won't become mainstream until they offer a sense of touch. But people who want to run and jump far would be the early adopters.

  • old news (Score:5, Informative)

    by savuporo ( 658486 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:41AM (#7753272)
    Check out http://plyojump.com and its accompanying blog [plyojump.com] for very good summaries on Japanese humanoid robot developments. ( the site seems to be down at the moment, but google cache [google.com] helps )
    QRIO was presented already back in august, at Robodex2003. QRIO is a direct followup, "production release" for previous development codenamed SDR-4XII.

    There were other bots presented at Robodex, that were able to perform jumps and even somersaults.

    The most interesting two IMO, are not megacorps entertainment bots ASIMO, AIBO etc, but humanoids that are of practical use or very low-budget, like HRP-II [aist.go.jp] that is able to [lookjapan.com] drive a backhoe [plyojump.com], remotely assisted

    And other one, SILF developed by a single person [so-net.ne.jp]( student ? ) on obviosly quite a low budget. Still, the bot is able to perform jumps.
  • But does it have real People Personality?

    If so it will give weight to my theory that Sony consists of a bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.
  • "Did I hear correctly? Are your newest robots running?"
    "Yes sir they are."
    "Then you better go catch them!"

    pa-dum-cha! [boooo! hissss!]

  • This is really a great breakthrough! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Gethsemane ( 733524 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:43AM (#7753289)
    My masters thesis is in robotics and most individuals do not comprehend how hard it is to make a bi-pedal robot walk unsupported. When you examine the biomechanics of a simple taks of walking, you quickly realize just how impressive of a feat it really is! (You parents out there know what I am talking about.) Baiscally to walk you have to fall forward and catch yourself with a leg that swings infront of you. Essentially you are in an equilibrium of falling forward and balancing yourself with your feet. Of course this is an over simplified approach and doesn't consider how your toes or balls of your foot assist. Bravo to Sony! And hopefully Honda and Sony get into a race and do some real development with each of their respective robots.
  • In case you're a little slow on the metric conversions, 14 meters per minute is only a little over half a mile per hour (i.e. way slower than a normal walking pace for a full sized person). At that slow it's not so much running as it is walking with a little hop during each step.
    • oooorrr... you could *read* the article (or even just look at the pretty pictures) and see that the robot is about 60cm in height....

      Which means it is actually running pretty quick.
  • Skynet becomes self aware on Thursday December 18th, 2003.

  • Fuel Cells (Score:5, Insightful)

    by G4from128k ( 686170 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:46AM (#7753309)
    This is where fuel cells [slashdot.org] will really come in handy. All jokes aside, a robot that can down a jug of methanol (and dump its waste water) and be refuelled in 30 seconds would be vastly superior to a robot that must be tethered for an hour or more to recharge its batteries. The superior energy density and speed of "recharging" make fuel cells the way to go.
    • I, for one, welcome our new aloholic humaniod robot overlords.

      My only question is, how can the robots protect us from the terrible secret of space without a katana and kendo skills?

  • QRIO Home Page (Score:5, Informative)

    by jpatokal ( 96361 ) * on Thursday December 18, 2003 @09:54AM (#7753384) Homepage
    The obvious missing link:

    http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/QRIO/ [sony.net]

    And in English too!

  • Reuters coverage of this story is here [reuters.com]

    Sig
    -- Compare war time president's military record (www.awolbush.com [awolbush.com]) with Wesley Clark's (Wesley Clark's Army Career [clark04.com])

  • Significant? Only partly... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by heironymouscoward ( 683461 ) <heironymouscowar ... .com minus punct> on Thursday December 18, 2003 @10:01AM (#7753437) Journal
    Building a two-legged robot that can stand and move upright is significant because it opens the door to a host of devices such as robotised prosthetics for handicapped people, exoskeletons, and so on.

    But please don't take the humanoid shape seriously. It is no more meaningful than a piece of wood carved into a humanoid puppet.

    Japanese technology often makes objects that are cute and play to our anrthopomorphic instincts, but two-legs/two-arms/head do not make a human any more than the aibo is a real dog.

    So enough of the "robot rights" and "robot soldier" comments, these are just embarassing. Asimov wrote fiction, and humanoid robots with human rights are like nuclear-powered flying cars, they say a lot about the hopes and fears of the time, but nothing at all about the realities of the future.

    As has been commented, a majority of real humans do not have basic human rights, and probably never will. Robots are machines however cute they look. Get over it.

    Robot soldiers? Of course, but why on earth in such a useless configuration? The robotic armies of the future will fly, roll, crawl, dig, swim. They will not look like people: given how good we are at detecting differences between people, even imagining humanoid robots built to infiltrate and deceive is pure fantasy.

    What's left? First, a wonderful gadget, a toy. I'd like some of these at my parties, fembots with all the right curves, dancing on the stage. Secondly, some very innovative and useful technology for building new kinds of motive systems, especially for assisting people who don't have the full use of their own legs.
    • Robots are machines however cute they look. Get over it.

      If you get a pacemaker, can we deny you your rights?
    • One word: versatility.

      The configuration may not be the most adept at any one particular type of motion, but the humanoid design allows for a greater range in the types of motion that could be accomodated in the first place. And in an unpredictable environment, versatility can mean the difference between accomplishing the desired goal and having spent half a billion dollars on an essentially useless lump of metal that can't get past an unforseen obstacle.

      We would design robots the way we are built for w

  • Other then the technological marvel of the controls required for balancing the robot, wouldn't it be so much more cheaper, and efficient for the robot to be on wheels or caterpillar tracks or four legs to travel? You wouldn't think that Bipedular movement is the most efficient form of transport for a robot.

  • Press Release Text (Score:5, Informative)

    by cloudless.net ( 629916 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @10:11AM (#7753519) Homepage
    World's First Running Humanoid Robot

    Tokyo Japan, December 18th, 2003 - Sony Corporation today announced the development of dramatically enhanced motion of Sony's humanoid robot, enabling integrated motion control for walking, jumping and running. By applying this technology to QRIO, which is one of Sony's technology platforms, Sony has successfully created the world's first* running humanoid robot.
    (* As of Dec. 18th, 2003, based on Sony's investigation, as an autonomous robot with internalized control system and power supply system)

    In order to achieve stable motion control for conventional humanoid robots, either one or both feet needed to be touching the floor and, from the opposing force produced by the contact with either of the feet, motion such as walking was controlled. This is the control theory based on the so called ZMP (Zero Moment Point) stable range and forms the foundation of robot motion control.

    The new 'walking, jumping, running movement control' technology which Sony has developed this time accomplishes motion involving both feet losing contact with the floor at the same time, which means it is a motion control technology enabling stable running and jumping. The seamless addition of motion control based on this new technology enabling running and jumping, has lead to the development of a robot having outstanding motion capabilities.

    Furthermore, together with this new control technology, in addition to powering-up and enhancing the output torque of Sony's original and unique robot actuator, ISA (Intelligent Servo Actuator), a new hardware unit suitable for the running feature has been developed. By implementing this newly developed ISA in QRIO and optimizing the new control system, Sony has successfully created the world's first running feature for a humanoid robot.

    Sony will continue to utilize the QRIO platform for various technological advances, leading to outstanding entertainment robots highly suited to the co-existence with humans and to the development of various technologies which can be applied to other Sony products. In addition, QRIO is Sony Group's Corporate Ambassador ;in fulfilling this role, QRIO will take advantage of various opportunities around the world to communicate Sony's vision of a world of dreams, entertainment and curiosity as well as introducing the technology that makes this vision a reality.

    QRIO's Homepage : http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/QRIO/

  • Ummm.... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Bif Powell ( 726774 )
    Sony Claims First Running Humanoid Robot Hasn't Honda's ASIMO [honda.com] been around for a couple years? ASIMO was walking and dancing bipedal-y since it was built...maybe I'm missing something...ASIMO and this thing look a lot alike as well.

  • Reason to destroy all (Score:4, Funny)

    by Matrix_X ( 145593 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @10:48AM (#7753840)
    So, the first thing Sony does when it creates walking robots is put them in a chorus line. If that's not a reason for the robots to take over earth and destroy everyone, I dont know what is.

  • My English Translation (Score:4, Informative)

    by mattr ( 78516 ) <mattr&telebody,com> on Thursday December 18, 2003 @11:30AM (#7754261) Homepage Journal
    This is pretty cool, I guess Honda's on the run! (Sorry)

    QRIO sounds like "Curio" i.e. Curious. Actually it means "Quest for Curiosity" and QRIO is also the name of a tiny Aibo-like robot Sony made in 2000 with the same exterior form. The big running robot was apparently called the SDR Series but after many changes (and names?) it got christened the QRIO as the little guy's successor. So I guess you could buy the little one and imagine it is similar to the big one.. it has some of the same technology too.

    The interesting part is that the robot is really running, although not with the big strides you normally expect in human running. As opposed to walking there is actually a short timespan when both feet are in the air (20-40 milliseconds). When it lands it is really loud and you really feel like it is running. Also it is able to grab things so it can run with a ball, do a Japanese fan dance, etc. Apparently it can also get programmed to do tons of really hokey gestures.

    Here are a couple links and finally a translation I made.

    http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/200312/0 3- 060E/ A separate English press release on the big one
    http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/QRIO/ English letter from CEO with a complex Flash-based piece about QRIO (the small one), its technology, inventor, visits around the world. There is a picture of a hand knocking it over (it can get up which is cool) and the technology section is actually pretty interesting. Actually it is really confusing since you can't tell how big these things are in pictures all the time, I thought at first that this was about the big robot! The small robot uses a special actuator technology which lets it move and dance fluidly, no idea if the big one has this too.

    Translation of http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/2003/1218/sony. htm

    Latest News 12/18
    QRIO Ran! Introducing the QRIO, Evolved by Sony
    - Acheiving the first running bipedal robot in the world -

    Announced Dec. 18

    On the 18th, Sony held a press conference showcasing the new technology behind their bipedal robot. There, Sony announced QRIO which has newly evolved from the bipedal walking of the past into a "running robot".

    QRIO is a miniature humanoid robot announced in 2000 which could walk on its two feet. At the time it was called the "SDR Series", but afterwards went through various improvements and was renamed the QRIO in September 2003.

    Toshitada Doi, Executive Vice President (photo)

    The technology announced today enable walking, jumping, and cruising around. According to Sony Executive Vice President Toshitada Doi, "There is a harsh competition going on around the world in getting bipedal robots to run, but the QRIO is the first standalone robot with its own control and power systems in the world that has succeeded in running."

    "Running" is defined as "leg-powered change of position including an airborne state in which both of the robot's legs leave the ground". In fact with the QRIO, there exists an instant of floating in the air that lasts about 20ms when walking and about 40ms when running.

    Aside from basic movement straight ahead, it can also run from side to side and in a circular fashion. Also, from a standstill it can seamlessly change its movement for example walking -> running -> jumping.

    According to Mr. Yoshihiro Kuroki of [Sony's] Entertainment Robot Company, in order to carry out the bodily control for walking and jumping, high performance control of sensors which measure its situation, road surface adjustment, adjustment to deal with external forces, shock absorption control and so on.. but from a mechanical standpoint it is apparently not greatly different from the old QRIO. Looking at the announced robot from the outside, one could not tell the difference from the old one.

    (illustration captions)
    1. A graph measuring the force on the floor. When jumping and running there is, though slight, a length of time in which t

  • Uh oh! (Score:5, Funny)

    by nsxdavid ( 254126 ) * <dw&play,net> on Thursday December 18, 2003 @11:36AM (#7754323) Homepage
    Has anyone read between the lines of the QRIO's feature list? This reads like a good er... bad Tom Clancy or Michael Crichton story...

    These robots are designed to interact with you and ask you questions, learning and remembering the things you say and they observe. They are also wirelessly linked to the Internet.

    Doesn't take much of a leap fo faith to see them all reporting into the SONY master mainframe. Watching, learning, snooping. Gathering data, intel...

    Oh sure, this could be the minor conspiracy: They are doing this to market to us better. "Hmm, boy I'd like a new laptop but I only have $1000 to spend." Robot overhears, reports in... suddenly you get an offer in email (or by the robot itself) for, guess what, a laptop that only cost's $1,200 (hell anyone can come up with antoher two K eh?).

    Or maybe, it's going to be the lead element of an invasion force. Japan might still be sore at us for the whole losing WWII and us nuking them (twice) and all.

    Someone in the land of the rising sun, somewhere, thought, "We'll lie low, developing our technology and build robots. Oh not to kill... not at first. Just to be their friends. Yes, FRIENDLY robots. Robotos that will be a 'partner', that talks to them, plays with them, encourages them.... yes. And it'll watch and learn and remember. And report. And as they get comfortable, they'll upgrade thir robots to our next version. Soon they won't think about it; no more than buying a better DVD player (which we'll invent too). And then, one night, in their sleep... they'll never know what hit them."

    FEAR QRIO!

  • Luckily, I speak Japanese (Score:4, Funny)

    by Hao Wu ( 652581 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @12:00PM (#7754548) Homepage
    In the article, "QRIO??????20007323???????" translates "Shake that thang" and "??????40ms20ms???" is Japanese for "Watch yourself."

  • Wait until the RIAA gets a load of this: (Score:3, Insightful)

    by SLot ( 82781 ) on Thursday December 18, 2003 @05:35PM (#7757853) Homepage Journal
    From story #4 on the QRIO homepage:

    "QRIO can connect to the internet and share the kind of information you like to hear!"

    Great. So I buy a robot, and it's instantly a felon, just for playing a few mp3's.

    *sigh*

Slashdot Top Deals

Neutrinos have bad breadth.

Close