Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Korea Unveils World's Second Android 232

Posted by ScuttleMonkey from the annoying-automated-system-face-to-face dept.
Chosun Ilbo is reporting that Korea has unveiled the worlds second android. From the article: "Korea has developed its own android capable of facial expressions on its humanoid face, the second such machine to be developed after one from Japan. The Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Energy invited some 60 children to the Kyoyuk Munhwa Hoekwan in Seoul to introduce Ever-1 to the public. The name combines the first human name found in the Bible, Eve, with the 'r' in robot."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Korea Unveils World's Second Android More

Korea Unveils World's Second Android

Comments Filter:

  • Yeah (Score:2, Funny)

    by kitsunewarlock ( 971818 )
    The first andriod being Abraham Lincoln at Knott's Berry Farm. "Four Score and seven years ago..." *random flash photographer* "DESTROY! DESTROY!" But seriously, its kinda sad that Asia's mass media usually puts robots in such a good light (as oppossed to our western "there taking over!" luddite outlook) that we won't be producing anything like this for a while. I for one welcome our new robot masters, with their 6 facial expressions and 400 phrases.

    • Re:Yeah (Score:4, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @09:16PM (#15298285)
      "there taking over!"

      If these robots know the difference between "they're" and "there" (or "you're" and "your"), we are truly fucked.

      -Luddite Westerner
    • Great Moments with Mr. Lincoln was at Disneyland, not Knott's.

      Still, I'm rather looking forward to Mr. Jobs' Wild Ride.

  • terrible name (Score:3, Funny)

    by MS_Word ( 877966 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @08:45PM (#15298145)
    It's almost as bad as B-4

  • Gynoid (Score:1, Informative)

    by MITDude ( 767140 )
    Isn't that a gynoid, not an android?

  • Second? (Score:3, Informative)

    by heatdeath ( 217147 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @08:46PM (#15298152)
    Uh...there's only been one before that? What do they define as an android? Because there's obviously a very low bar of quality if they consider that to be an android. Pretty sure all of the tin cans with legs from the 1950's should also qualify as androids if this does.
    • What do they define as an android?

      Apparently they're using the term to refer to a gynoid [wikipedia.org].

  • Second comes right after first [long pause]
  • The Uncanny Valley attacks again! This one gives me the creeps!
    At least this one looks slightly less creepy than that SimPal thing from 6th Day.

  • Now that we have two androids (Score:3, Funny)

    by koweja ( 922288 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @08:50PM (#15298170)
    the only possible solution is to have them fight to the death Rock 'em Sock 'em Robot Style

  • "Uncanny Valley" (Score:4, Insightful)

    by foreverdisillusioned ( 763799 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @08:54PM (#15298182) Journal
    I dunno, judging by the pictures it looks like we haven't quite reached the other side of the Uncanny Valley [wikipedia.org] yet.
    • The thing most people don't realize is that people can be in the uncanny valley with respect to other people. This is one of the why wars are (must be?) fought. This is also why "but a gecko, he can be trusted".
      • Can you rephrase that?
      • True, all too true. I've worked with the physically and mentally handicapped for the past 5 years, and I can definitely confirm this. If people would just admit that the valley is there, it would be a lot easier for them to overcome it. Unfortuately, most are in denial, and as you said this a primary reason for wars and strife in general.

        Btw, I couldn't help noticing your nick. What side of the valley do you think Gadget is on? ;-)
    • judging by the pictures it looks like we haven't quite reached the other side of the Uncanny Valley yet.

      No, but I'm sure we're going to find the Creepy Valley Dwellers [fiftytwofifty.com] soon.

    • I realize your post is not an example of what I am about to complain about ;) But the phrase/notion "uncanny valley" gets tossed around way too much... Roger Ebert cited it as something that affected him while watching one of those stupid animated movies with talking animals. The wiki page cites the "uncanny valley" as a possible reason for the failure of The Spirits Within at the box office. Wow... those are some stupid conclusions.

      Truth be told, most people could handle seeing something that is not alive,

      • While I do agree that the Uncanny Valley is often invoked inappropriately (particularly the FF movie, which suffered from ill-conceived plot more than it did creepy animation), I have trouble with your premise that the Uncanny Valley would disappear with increased familiarity.

        Just because we have learned to overcome, through repetitive conditioning, a particular instinct, it does not follow that the instinct just disappears or does not have an impact. Rather, it gets buried into the subconscious. And Freu

        • Just because we have learned to overcome, through repetitive conditioning, a particular instinct, it does not follow that the instinct just disappears or does not have an impact.

          I hear what you are saying, but I don't think the uncanny valley qualifies as an "instinct" that is simply being repressed through familiarity. The valley is simply a reaction to something that you are not used to seeing. The feeling of uneasiness is understandable - it is, after all, a little weird to see something appear very l

          • I think, though, that the 'uncanny valley' phenomenon is not simply a novelty reaction. I think, much like other animals, humans have an 'avoid corpses!' instinct (or perhaps a more general 'avoid unhealthy looking human-like objects!' instinct). Many people are creeped out by full-body mannequins no matter how much they are exposed to them, which I imagine is why most clothing shops have switched over to partial torso/bust mannequins.

            • I think, much like other animals, humans have an 'avoid corpses!' instinct (or perhaps a more general 'avoid unhealthy looking human-like objects!' instinct).

              Ahh, my point exactly. People that see things that seem "alive" but are in fact "dead" confuse these two states -- dead, and alive. That is precisely where the uneasiness comes from.

              My point, is that with more exposure, these misconceptions get "nipped in the bud", so to speak. The confusion is avoided (and ultimately we are only talking about co
      • I think the term can apply to things other than robots. Japanese-style animation, I don't have a problem with, but I can kinda see how someone could. For me, a prime example of something that's smack dab in the middle of the valley is CG along the lines of Baby Geniuses. I never saw the movie, but the trailers were bad enough. Who the hell finds that the least bit cute? It's disturbing as hell. Now Look Who's Talking was another matter entirely. That was alright, even cute at times. It would also be
      • I have to disagree with you. I definitely feel the 'Uncanny Valley' applies to FF Spirits Within. My first thoughts watching the movie were 'Wow, they are not -quite- real looking. It's kind of creepy.' That was closely followed by 'Eh, wasn't the CG in FF7 better than this?'

        Just because you (and maybe a billion others) don't feel this way, that doesn't mean the concept doesn't apply. You may even be right about the Uncanny Valley having nothing to do with its poor sales. But that doesn't mean the con
    • I think the Uncanny Valley explains people's reactions to transvestites. Almost, but not quite there.

  • Did anyone notice... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BitwizeGHC ( 145393 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @08:56PM (#15298195) Homepage
    Did anyone notice that both the Koreans and the Japanese have done exactly what Saber Marionette, Mahoromatic, and Cat Girl Nuku Nuku have predicted, and that is direct their formidable robotics skills to the building of more and more realistic, supple-skinned robot women?

    • Re:Did anyone notice... (Score:4, Funny)

      by Gojira Shipi-Taro ( 465802 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @09:09PM (#15298248) Homepage
      /obvious

      I, for one WELCOME our supple-skinned android overlords!

      /!obvious
    • So T3 is a more realistic scenario over T1 & T2. *That movie had such a lack of soul that you'd think it was directed by a robot too..* Or would BSG be a better looking scary future.. ?-) *Yes..*

    • Re:Did anyone notice... (Score:4, Funny)

      by Frogbert ( 589961 ) <frogbert@nOSpAm.gmail.com> on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @09:53PM (#15298462)
      ... I fail to see the negative.

    • Re:Did anyone notice... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by patio11 ( 857072 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @10:31PM (#15298606)
      Working at a Japanese technology incubator makes me wonder whether I should laugh politely at jokes like this or slap my head in frustration (now, for the Insightful mods, thats a fairly obvious head-slap decision). "The Japanese" haven't invested in supple-skinned robots. One research institute invested in supple-skinned robots, and got some press because it makes good copy. Meanwhile, hundreds upon hundreds of laboratories, including one which is one floor below me, have made robots to do industrial work, assist old folks, do disaster recovery, explore the sea floor, provide pet-level companionship, help people with spinal injuries walk again, etc etc etc. Its like saying "You know what Americans invented the Internet for? Duh, porn, who couldn't have seen that coming. Oh well, everyone knew Americans were crazy sex fiends, as we could have easily gathered from a representative survey of American literature like Porky's, Fast Times at Ridgemont High, and American Pie." These sort of generalizations contain a bit of truth with a whole lot of stupid. (Side note: stupid makes an excellent noun.)

    • Feh (Score:3, Insightful)

      by foreverdisillusioned ( 763799 )
      Anyone who's ever been in a Sex Shop could've made the same prediction.
  • So we no longer have to deal with an easily navigable touchscreen kiosk, we get to deal with something that exhibits emotion--I wonder if that includes confusion... It's also interesting that the capabilities include "reading to children" (as if video games aren't sufficient caretakers)

  • Digi-Björk? (Score:5, Funny)

    by awtbfb ( 586638 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @08:58PM (#15298202)
    The fact that the robot resembles Björk just makes it creepier. Maybe they should have dressed it up in a swan dress...

  • But the question is..... (Score:5, Funny)

    by 8127972 ( 73495 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @09:01PM (#15298213)
    ..... Is it FULLY FUNCTIONAL in EVERY way?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_(Star_Trek)#Quot ations [wikipedia.org]
    • ..... Is it FULLY FUNCTIONAL in EVERY way? (poster then refers to ST:TNG)
      When I first saw that episode, my ex-girlfriend who was sitting next to me said "Data's got to be the most complicated vibrator ever conceived! Have you seen him type? That girl is horny and smart."
  • I would expect the second to be better than the first (done by a different team, I know). I was much more impressed by Repliee [wikipedia.org] which looks much more human-like than the picture in the article.
  • I've seen at least a few of this guy's robots...

    http://www.boingboing.net/2005/06/23/philip_k_dick _robot.html [boingboing.net]

    They seem to do everything that makes this robot a big deal. Why is it considered only the second ever?
    • I have no frigging clue how the "world's second android" game is played, but maybe these guys didn't think that one counts because it's missing [smh.com.au]. Still, the same people who did PKD-Bot already made an Einstein [hansonrobotics.com] android (The article says it has "frubber" in it!) so I think the claim here is bogus, especially since this one can't walk or anything particularly novel. Maybe they mean it's the second Asian android or something?

  • Missing the point on "Eve", and wierd eyes (Score:3, Interesting)

    by SuperBanana ( 662181 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @09:17PM (#15298296)
    The name combines the first human name found in the Bible, Eve, with the 'r' in robot.

    I'm hardly Christian, but Eve was also the first MOTHER. Unless this thing cranks out robot babies, they've got a bit of a misnomer.

    Also...did anyone else get a wierd feeling looking at the close-up photo of her face? I finally figured it out- she is (or looks) slightly cross-eyed. Took me a while to figure it out, but the second I saw the photo I knew something was "wrong" (a phenomenon special effects guys know all too well. You may not realize it, but your brain immediately picks up on things like shadows that aren't in the right place and stuff.)

    I believe we are especially sensitive to the messages the eyes convey. So even if this thing gives the correct answer to "where can I find the Ministry of Whatever" or "have you seen my bento box", maybe it'll really disturb people on a level they won't immediately figure out.

    I'd love to hear what all those schoolkids said in the ride home or back at dinner with Mom and Dad...

    • crosseyed:
      I once heard that puppeteers purpously make their dolls very very slightly crosseyed to generate the illusion that the doll is looking at you.
      They said that if you do not do this, the puppet will appear to have 'dead' look, or appears to be looking right through you. Maybe the Koreans tried this but overdid it?
      • I didn't think they looked that weird. From what I have observed (ok, only in the movies) Japanese girls look kinda cross-eyed when they're focusing on you - or something less than a few meters away.

        It might be they only cast slightly cross-eyed girls in the movies though, since it looks kinda cute.

        I was impressed with the eyes on this one. Although the close-up photo is pretty low-res they seem to have gotten the iris right. I'm sure I would say otherwise if I saw this thing moving, though.
    • Also...did anyone else get a wierd feeling looking at the close-up photo of her face? I finally figured it out- she is (or looks) slightly cross-eyed.

      I think it's something different. --Everybody is slightly cross-eyed when they look at things close up.

      I feel slightly creeped out by ALL mannequins, but since I've seen a few zillion in my life, I don't register it anymore. --But that's largely based on the non-luminescence of plastic skin, (real skin is slightly see-through), the fact that eyes don't track
    • I'm hardly Christian, but Eve was also the first MOTHER. Unless this thing cranks out robot babies, they've got a bit of a misnomer.

      Maybe it does. [scarytoyclown.com] Noelle, the pregnant robot [gaumard.com] a can pump out like 5 an hour.

  • Wouldn't Adam be the first (Score:5, Insightful)

    by neomage86 ( 690331 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @09:36PM (#15298377)
    human name in the bible? I mean from what I understand, Eve was made out of his rib ...
    • human name in the bible? I mean from what I understand, Eve was made out of his rib ...

      That would depend on which of the creation myths in the old testament you chose to believe in.
      • What exactly do you mean by which of the creation myths? There's only one creation story in the Bible.

        Genesis chapter 1 [biblegateway.com] tells the story of the whole creation, from day 1 to day 6, in very general terms. Genesis chapter 2 [biblegateway.com] retells the story of day 6 and forward in greater detail. It's very clear that Adam was created first, and Eve was created from Adam's rib (Genesis 2:18-23).

        • Say what now? Have you even read the bible?

          In chapter 1, God creates both man and woman in his own image, they are the last thing He creates, AFTER all the animals, even. In chapter 2, God creates man, decides it is not good for him to be alone, and so creates all of the animals. But this is not enough, so He creates woman from the man's rib. They don't even get their names until chapter 3.
          • erm.. my first sentence was uncalled for. But they're still two different stories. There's enough overlap and contradiction that they really can't be the same story.
          • In chapter 2, God creates man, decides it is not good for him to be alone, and so creates all of the animals.

            Actually, if you read Genesis 2:19*, it implies the animals were already created and God just herded them past Adam to find a "suitable helper". So you can read that either way, depending on your own preconceived notions.

            *No, I don't have the Bible memorized, I looked this up on BibleGateway.com.
    • That's what I was thinking too. Except that Adam is simply Hebrew for "man," so maybe it's not really a name.

      Either that, or it's some radical feminists trying to revise history again.
    • Genesis chapter 2 is written from the perspective of god and calls adam simply "man". God made the man, then made the helper for him, and the man named her "woman". It's only later in chapter 3 before the expulsion from Eden, that they are named Eve and Adam. According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] these passages are from 2 different sources.
    • Nice point, but there's more to it than just that.

      "Adam" does mean "man." Good for all of you that like to point that out. However, is it a name, too? Actually, yes. Hold on, it's going to get complex...

      1.) If "Adam" was not the name, then his name would have been given in chapter 3 when Eve's is (before then she's just called "the woman"). But since it holds through the next few chapters and even the rest of the Bible as "Adam," it's most likley that this is, in fact, a name.

      2.) For those of you Am

  • Who was the first? (Score:5, Funny)

    by cgenman ( 325138 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @09:40PM (#15298398) Homepage
    Keanu Reeves?

  • here [youtube.com]

  • two female androids eh.. (Score:3, Funny)

    by spacerodent ( 790183 ) on Tuesday May 09, 2006 @09:45PM (#15298423)
    so how long till someone adds the hot lesbian makeout subrutine
  • It's the world's second andrdoid and its name is ever?

    Does that make it The World's Second Android Ever?

    Thank you, thank you!
  • Evil-1?

    it's hard to tell with that accent.
  • She'll rule the World, crushing all with her giant man hands!

  • Waaaaste (Score:2, Funny)

    by Tablizer ( 95088 )
    Forget the damned facial expressions. I wanna robot to take out the garbage, fetch a drink, and do the laundry. And WITHOUT facial expressions. Otherwise, it is a fricken ewife.
  • I heard a rumor that at E3 we'll see what happens when they put five of these things together!
  • Haven't they seen the runaway-female-assassin-robot-movie starring Gregory Hines, Eve of Destruction [imdb.com] ?
  • That thing is creepy.

    I found myself reviewing my combat advantages; I'm stronger, faster, smarter, have better balance and my parts take longer to wear. . .

    For now anyway.

    Talk about basic instincts. It's just a collection of parts with a plastic skin pulled over top; A dumb toy, and yet my fight or flight responses were engaged.

    I have an idea; let's NOT build soul-less robo-creatures. We have enough organic ones walking around as it is. They bore me, creep me out, and I wouldn't want to have sex with one
  • Android comes from the greek root andro- meaning man. The word "androgynous" comes from the gree words for both Man and Woman and means having both male and female qualities.

    Since this machine is female in form, it should not be called an android, but a gynoid. :-)

  • Adam's name appears a whole chapter before Eve's, for heaven's sake! While I applaud the invention of this rubbery-looking, creepy android, I think the next model is going to have to be able to sort single-digit numbers.

    P.S. Dokdo is Korean territory! Dokdo nun uri ddang! No, wait, I changed my mind. Takeshima is Japanese! Takeshima ha nihon no ryoudo -- no, wait, it's Korean! Man, I love territorial disputes, especially ones in the East Sea. No, I mean the Sea of Japan.

  • When are they gonna announce a technology-sharing partnership with Real Doll [realdoll.com]. That's when I'll really take notice!

    Tom Caudron
    http://tom.digitalelite.com/ [digitalelite.com]

  • How is a gyndroid's face.. (Score:3, Funny)

    by murderlegendre ( 776042 ) on Wednesday May 10, 2006 @07:21AM (#15299997)

    Q: How is a gyndroid's face like a frontpage Slashdot article?

    A: There may be two other entries, just below it.

  • This is s'posed to be a new thing? What about disney animatronics? Or did they not do facial expressions?
  • Who would win?
  • ...they get around to the Cherry2000 [imdb.com] model.

    Or, maybe not.

    --
    agenda discarded : words swirling around the room : the meeting is derailed

  • ...the 24th century! :-)

    Does anybody have a link to a video of this "android"?
  • Korea re-unified while I was asleep?
  • Ever-1 has nothing to do with the bible... whoever supplied that explanation is an idiot...

    Ever-1 == Everyone with a slight Korean accent, duh. Eve + the r in robot, please... that's the crudest attempt at decrypting a codename I've ever seen.

    It also would symbolize that she is unique and always will be, as an early model unit she will never be reproduced, ie: ever alone/unique, Ever-1.

Slashdot Top Deals

Like punning, programming is a play on words.

Close