Forgot your password?

How To Change U.S. Laws To Promote Robotics 118

Posted by Soulskill
from the just-worry-about-the-kill-all-humans-part dept.
An anonymous reader writes "A law professor says the U.S. could fall behind in the robotics race if we don't change product liability law. A new op-ed over at Mashable expands upon this: Yet for all its momentum, robotics is at a crossroads. The industry faces a choice — one that you see again and again with transformative technologies. Will this technology essentially be closed, or will it be open? ... What does it mean for robotics to be closed? Resembling any contemporary appliance, they are designed to perform a set task. They run proprietary software and are no more amenable to casual tinkering than a dishwasher. Open robots are just the opposite. By definition, they invite contribution. It has no predetermined function, runs third-party or even open-source software, and can be physically altered and extended without compromising performance. Consumer robotics started off closed, which helps to explain why it has moved so slowly."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

How To Change U.S. Laws To Promote Robotics

Comments Filter:
  • by umafuckit (2980809) on Wednesday January 01, 2014 @05:04PM (#45839561)
    None of this is really what the article is about, though. The thesis is simply that manufacturers of open robotics platforms (which are out there right now) should not be legally responsible for what people do with those platforms. The argument is that making them liable will reduce the pace of innovation.

Every young man should have a hobby: learning how to handle money is the best one. -- Jack Hurley