Will You Even Notice the Impending Robot Uprising? 246
An anonymous reader writes "We tend to take things like household appliances and other automation for granted, but as O'Reilly's Mike Loukides puts it: 'The Future Is All Robots. But Will We Even Notice? We've watched the rising interest in robotics for the past few years. It may have started with the birth of FIRST Robotics competitions, continued with the iRobot and the Roomba, and more recently with Google's driverless cars. But in the last few weeks, there has been a big change. Suddenly, everybody's talking about robots and robotics. ... I have no doubt that Google’s robotics team is working on something amazing and mind-blowing. Should they succeed, and should that success become a product, though, whatever they do will almost certainly fade into the woodwork and become part of normal, everyday reality. And robots will remain forever in the future. We might have found Rosie, the Jetsons’ robotic maid, impressive. But the Jetsons didn’t.'"
I had a dream. (Score:5, Funny)
"I came here with a simple dream. A dream of killing all humans." B.B. Rodriguez
Re: (Score:2)
"I need to practice my stabbin!" - Roberto
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj2dmQruJXs [youtube.com]
Suspicious sign: (Score:5, Funny)
My Roomba ordered me to get off my "lazy human ass" and vacuum the house myself.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh wait -- that's more likely because that's the hardest-to-clean spot in the house....
Yes. Yes! Stupid human, think that!
Nope. People will deny that they are robots. (Score:5, Insightful)
I take a train to work (and home again) that has no driver. Yet, to a person, everybody disagrees with me that a robot drives me to work.
Re: (Score:3)
The robot revolution will not be televised.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not claiming that this is the correct answer, but I think of a robot as a machine that is capable of autonomously performing a variety of highly different tasks.
I guess I'm a robot denier.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
A thermostat is a robot. Automated factories are full of robots, some of which can simply rivet one rivet or whatever, while some can do quite a variety. A tape library certainly contains a robot.
Robotics is just about reacting to the environment to perform some mechanical tasks. The ability to KILL ALL HUMANS is not strictly required.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, *almost* certainly. I used to be a tape operator, doing the grunt work in a tape library with no robots. While such things are now almost as rare as punchcard machines (which I also used to operate), I figure there's probably still a few out there.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not claiming that this is the correct answer, but I think of a robot as a machine that is capable of autonomously performing a variety of highly different tasks.
I guess I'm a robot denier.
This is why the robots will take over. Because people will always demean the work that robots do as being too simplistic to pose a serious threat. But once people start to realize that the majority of all the work that humans do today is pretty simplistic, it may be too late.
Re:Nope. People will deny that they are robots. (Score:5, Funny)
I gave my Roomba a shot at driving the car; but it's not very good. Whenever it saw litter on the side, it swerved toward it.
Re: (Score:2)
I take a train to work (and home again) that has no driver. Yet, to a person, everybody disagrees with me that a robot drives me to work.
Unless you count the train itself as a robot (which isn't anywhere near as mad as it may sound), no, you're not driven to work by a robot.
Re: (Score:2)
Unless you count the train itself as a robot
I think that's exactly what he's getting at; and he's not far off (by our current definition of robotics)
Re:Level of AI (Artificial Intelligence) (Score:4, Interesting)
What level of AI?
Apple IIe disk drives (in 1983!) used to come with a program that would play 20 questions with you and guess the animal you were thinking of. It could even learn to a certain extent.
All that has happened since then in AI, is that the knowledge base has gotten larger.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Very few. Those papers tend to be very philosophical, and not so technical. They usually present new ways to think about storing and processing data; not necessarily designs for artificial intelligence.
Re: (Score:2)
Here's the thing: We don't actually want them to think for themselves. We want machines that can interpret higher and higher level instructions -- "drive me to work", not "steer right 30 degrees, accelerate at 1 m/s**2, steer left 15 degrees"
why an uprising? (Score:2)
Why does the western world have such a preoccupation about robots always turning into killing machines that will try to destroy the entire human race?
Isnt it starting to get a bit cliche these days?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah it's not the first sentient robots you have to worry about. It's the armada of expansionist robots from outer space a few thousand years from now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But what about the Moon Nazis [imdb.com]?
Re: (Score:2)
Because the western world seems to get 95% of their "education" from movies and TV.
Re: (Score:2)
Most people don't have the faintest clue how technology works. It might as well be magic to them. Therefore, when people see things like the Terminator franchise, Battlestar Galactica, that terrible I, Robot movie, etc., the concept of a robot uprising seems plausible to them.
Re:why an uprising? (Score:4, Insightful)
Those who ignore sci-fi canon are doomed to live it.
Re: (Score:2)
Could it be because some of the biggest US robotics funding pushes come from ... DARPA?
Could it be because -- although the Google motto, "Don't Be Evil" is quite benign, a lot of people half suspect that they really wanted to say "Don't Be NSA", or "Be anything except the NSA", without saying "NSA"? So they substituted a synonym?
Could it be because the obsession of powerful westerners seems to be getting rid of anyone poorer than themselves?
Could it be because the elites of East and West have devoted a hug
Re: (Score:2)
You for got to add...
Could it be that we're developing robots to replace our jobs as quickly as possible, possibly leading to huge unemployment (which would fit nicely before your number 3).
Re: (Score:3)
Its the Frankenstein complex, Asimov noticed this trend in society of man fearing his own creations it goes back centuries, the Titans overthrown by there children the Olympian deities, Satan then Adam and Eve rebelling against God, Rabbi Loews Golum of Prague rebelling against its master and killing those that it was made to protect, Frankenstein fears his creation and rebukes it turning it into the monster he thought it to be, Rossums Robots of Rossems Universal Robots turning on the creator, then the cou
Re: (Score:2)
No but my dog will (Score:4, Funny)
dogs are our insurance against a robot uprising.
Only the technical barrier is about to be broken (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Because we have seen a backlash against the phone / Tablet / PC industry? Electronics are now use and chuck and are even designed with that in mind (non user replaceable batteries for one).
Also 3d printing requires resources and is only efficient on single print runs. It will remain quite a bit cheaper for a long time yet before 3d printing competes with mass production.
I have a neato robot vacuum. It is on literally every day. If you offered me something that could be the robo-maid from the jetsons I d
We'll notice. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
When robots have taken over the majority of labor and the number of unemployed people in the US rises over a billion, we'll notice. Does anyone else wonder how society will need to adapt to such a problem?
Going to be a while before we get to a billion people in the US, we're only 1/3 way there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Have you even looked at population growth expectations in the US? We don't hit 400 million till after 2060. At current growth rates we may never hit one billion. First world countries have problems with negative population growth.
Re: (Score:2)
the birth rate lowers but also consider immigration from higher birth rate areas especially from catholic countries like mexico and other central/south american countries will affect the birth rate and population numbers
Re: (Score:2)
Same thing that people did when looms took over the textile industry. When the electronic computers took over for human computers. When switching circuits took over from telephone operators. Move on to the next job that machines cannot do.
In the late 1800's 70-80% of the US workforce worked in agriculture. Today that number is 2-3%. If mechanization was going to leave people without jobs it would have already happened.
Of course the naysayers will cry that not everyone can be an x, y, or z. But why shoul
Re: (Score:3)
Same thing that people did when looms took over the textile industry. When the electronic computers took over for human computers. When switching circuits took over from telephone operators. Move on to the next job that machines cannot do.
And when we run out of jobs? It isn't turtles all the down, you know.
There will always be something. Even if that something is handcrafted hood ornaments.
Yeah, but who's going to buy them?
Re:We'll notice. (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, things did not go well for those particular people. Many of them starved to death and died homeless.
However, the next generation was okay and basically ignored the tragedy.
Probably be the same this time too. if 25% can't find work or housing-- then after 20 years, as a society, we'll just ignore the fact that that happened.
Yeah (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
How many robots were there in the 1930s?
Was there some special leap in robotics in 2008?
Robots are something to blame, but it's a misdirection ...
Re: (Score:2)
Re:We'll notice. (Score:4, Insightful)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mincome
Re: (Score:2)
Almost all agriculture jobs have vanished to automation. Almost all manufacturing jobs have vanished to automation. Almost all paper-shuffling jobs have vanished to automation. I don't think whatever's next will somehow be catastrophic when none of the previous cycles were.
Re: (Score:2)
Up till this point the capitalist needed the labor, it was still worthwhile somewhere. At what point does keeping a bunch of humans around make sense when you could kill off the masses and live in ultra-luxury?
Re:We'll notice. (Score:4, Funny)
you do realize the population of the US is only 330 milion currently.
You're talking a very long way off if so.
But when we have robots to do all of the work and everyone is unemployed, we'll all have a lot more time to have sex, so the population will skyrocket.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't it within a hundred years?
And why would that be? I'd have to say that the US probably wouldn't be over 500 million unless there was a lot more immigration than there currently is.
According to the Department of Labor, only 58% of adults in the USA are working, so we're already well over a hundred million not working.
And the public noticed which is an order of magnitude below your claimed threshold. Keep in mind how so many loony public and charity projects these days boast about how many jobs they create.
It's also worth noting that the US as well as many other developed world countries has worked hard to unemploy lots of its citizens which the developing world offer
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is far too many business miss just that. Instead they fight to the death over taxes, wages, and environmental protection that would help keep there business around in the future.
Re: (Score:2)
When the kill bots come and harvest your body for its mineral content.
I hardly noticed the mobile phone revolution... (Score:4, Interesting)
...until I saw non-geeks (or doctors) possessing them and blathering away like complete, oblivious idiots in places where sharing half a very personal conversation should have been abundantly clearly inappropriate.
I expect people will be as oblivious as the robots march past them, gathering in the town square, to proclaim the beginning of the end of Carbon Unit infestation of this world.
Androids (Score:2)
Too Far (Score:3)
I'm 37 and robots still can't perform the simple things I wanted them to do when I was 4
A robotic arm that can attach to drywall and is light enough to not need drywall anchors or drill into a stud. It is mounted above and/or behind the door. With the push of a remote, it opens/closes the door. I shouldn't have to replace the whole damn door. The robotic arm should adapt to a traditional door.
Robot, find my keys. No, the keys do not have an RFID tag. I know you don't know where they are right now. Systematically search for them without trampling pets or trashing my shit.
Shave me. Don't poke new holes in my face. No, I didn't need to shave when I was 4. Was just thinking about the future.
Scan every girl in the club. Breakdown the odds each girl could get pregnant tonight. Weed out those menstruating. OK, yeah, I definitely did not think about that when I was in 4. The tricorder fantasies came later.
Re:Too Far (Score:4, Informative)
I'm 37 and robots still can't perform the simple things I wanted them to do when I was 4
A robotic arm that can attach to drywall and is light enough to not need drywall anchors or drill into a stud. It is mounted above and/or behind the door. With the push of a remote, it opens/closes the door. I shouldn't have to replace the whole damn door. The robotic arm should adapt to a traditional door.
Why would you need or want a robot arm that can do that when you can just buy a simple automatic door opener [power-access.com]?
Even if it's light enough to hang on drywall without screwing into a stud, anything that moves and exerts force on the drywall is going to work loose eventually-- better to mount it to a stud, even if it's a high-tech robot arm.
Robot, find my keys. No, the keys do not have an RFID tag. I know you don't know where they are right now. Systematically search for them without trampling pets or trashing my shit.
Who wants a robot searching through the entire house? What if your girlfriend dropped the keys down her shirt? Let the robot fondle her too many times in search of keys and you may find that she no longer needs *you*!.
Shave me. Don't poke new holes in my face.
I don't even trust other humans to do that for me - and not even (*especially* not even) a barber with a straight razor, no matter how close the shave will be.
Scan every girl in the club. Breakdown the odds each girl could get pregnant tonight. Weed out those menstruating. OK, yeah, I definitely did not think about that when I was in 4. The tricorder fantasies came later.
You forgot the most important criteria "Identify which of the fertile (or infertile, depending on your preference) girls would be willing to go out with you"... which, if you're using a robot to screen out women based on where they are in their menstrual cycle, is easy to answer.... None of them.
Though a better way to get the kind of woman you're seeking would be to visit a brothel (legal or otherwise...). If all you're looking for is safe sex, it's much better to go to a professional.
I could certainly imagine some kind of hormone detector that can sample the air around the woman (or maybe her breath) could do what you want, but you don't need a robot for that.
Mod Parent up. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I always thought Twiki was a completely useless design.and Dr Theopolis should have been a dialup server someplace.
Re: (Score:2)
I always thought Twiki was a completely useless design.and Dr Theopolis should have been a dialup server someplace.
I thought he was a dial-up server, was his whole brain in that little device Twiki carried around his neck?
Re: (Score:3)
Scan every girl in the club. Breakdown the odds each girl could get pregnant tonight. Weed out those menstruating.
There's probably an app for that. (But not a good one; Night Club Girl only has a 1 star review.)
(Hm. Can we figure out a woman's period from her Facebook and Twitter posts? Scan text for negativism, correlate on 28 day cycle, sync to PMS period. OK, that's done. Next, check Foursquare and Twitter location for who's there. Run Anaface on the photos to decide who's hot and who's not. Check friends list to see who's attached to whom, and if their SO is present. Rank and provide list.)
Yes (Score:3)
You will certainly notice the robot uprising the next time you try to apply for a low-skill job that a robot can do. That's a lot of jobs. The only ones that are still done by humans are domestic service occupations. A robot can't fix your toilet yet. However, this being a down economy, any average person has little money and does everything he can to avoid buying any services, by, for instance, fixing the toilet himself, cleaning the house himself, and mowing his own lawn after fixing his own lawnmower. I predict repairmen will be in less demand as the depression progresses, and the final occupations exclusive to humans will nearly disappear.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We're about 300 years into human labor being replaced by automation, and we seem always to be able to invent more jobs. No matter how many jobs are replaced by automation, we as humans will always want more, and so will always find work for one another. It wasn't that long ago that almost everyone worked as a farmer, soldier, or manufacturing worker, but now all three of those have gone the way of the blacksmith and scribe: we found new ways to be productive.
Re:Yes (Score:4, Insightful)
We always seemed to be able to find more jobs because we replaced physical labor with mechanical labor, it's different this time. Now we are replacing intelligence. At some point it becomes cheaper to build a new robot to do a job then train a person to do it. Next, before the last 100 years we didn't have an audio global communications network, and the last 40-30 years a massively connected global digital network that made redundant a huge number of people. Productivity cannot stretch to infinity. At some point we have to either pay people to do nothing, or kill off a bunch of people.
Re: (Score:2)
Obligatory XKCD / What-If (Score:4, Informative)
http://what-if.xkcd.com/5/ [xkcd.com]
What if there was a robot apocalypse? How long would humanity last?
Re: (Score:2)
Not near as long as he makes out. If robots wanted to take the mass of us out in a suicide attack they'd just fry the electronically controlled power grid. Yes, they'd be screwed, but so would we. Without power, we all die in our city deserts. There is not enough food and water in a large city. It requires trucks to drive food there daily, which requires pumped gas.
Achem.. (Score:2)
as O'Reilly's Mike Loukides puts it...
"I read this in Popular Mechanics. In 1954. It was a slow news day, so I recycled it." Robotics has been something people have been talking about since... well, since they were first created half a century ago. This isn't news, this is olds.
most of us already manage the machines working (Score:5, Insightful)
Too late. Most of the jobs people did 100 years ago are now done by machines, while the machines do the work. It's the machines that actually touch the raw materials and the products.
The baker? Already replaced by someone running a bread-making machine (robot) that bakes 1,000 loaves per hour. How many humans touch that loaf of bread you buy in the grocery store? Approximately zero, and that's why you can buy it for 99. The lumberjack, chopping down trees? Already replaced by the harvester machine, with a human sitting inside, but not actually touching any trees. The butcher, the baker, and the candlestick maker were all replaced decades ago. They all became machine operators, operating machines that result in us walking into the grocery store and seeing 39 different kinds of sandwich bread to choose from.
Re: (Score:2)
that's why you can buy it for 99
99 what? Problems but a bitch ain't one? Bottles of beer on the wall? Luftballons? Yard Touchdown?
cents, Slashdot killed the cent sign (Score:2)
Slashdot silently deleted the cent sign.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry... (Score:2)
...my responses are limited; you must ask the right questions.
Exactly how it should be (Score:2)
If robots were treated only as tools instead of weapons or pets, we wouldn't have to worry about an uprising.
Re: (Score:2)
If robots were treated only as tools instead of weapons or pets, we wouldn't have to worry about an uprising.
Weapons *are* tools. They are only worrisome in the hands of other humans. Or pets. Or uprising robots.
Who's talking about robots? (Score:5, Funny)
"Suddenly, everybody's talking about robots and robotics. ..."
Obviously I'm going to the wrong parties, no one around me is talking about robots.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, one lady did say to me at a party, "I'd rather date a robot".
Re: (Score:2)
Well it could be that Google is actively developing robots, so there's that. And if nobody around you is talking about automation/robots, they are the idiots getting replaced by it.
Re: (Score:2)
Well it could be that Google is actively developing robots, so there's that. And if nobody around you is talking about automation/robots, they are the idiots getting replaced by it.
Or, maybe they've already been replaced? I just asked my coworker if he's a robot, and he immediately said "no", which is exactly what you'd expect a robot trying to hide his identity to say! Now he's whispering with a coworker and pointing to me -- obviously, they are planning the robot revolution.
We all might be already..Azimov (Score:2)
(Howard, Rajesh, and Shel
t in a circle around a game of Jenga they are playing.)
Howard: Sheldon, if you were a robot and I knew and you didn't ... would you want me to tell you?
Sheldon: That depends. When I learn that I'm a robot ... will I be able to handle it?
Howard: Maybe, although the history of science-fiction is not on your side.
Sheldon: Uh, let me ask you this. When I learn that I'm a robot, would I be bound by Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics?
Rajesh: (eyeing Sheldon suspiciously) You might be bound b
Installation and repair (Score:2)
The next frontier in robotics is installation and maintenance. A robot that can change parts in failed equipment is a ways off, but worth working on. Think of this as something for industrial plants, not homes. That's one of the few commercial applications that justifies a humanoid robot like Atlas. I wonder if Google is heading in that direction.
We need a basic income and better worker rights (Score:3)
So we do end up with people pulling 60-80+ weeks while other don't work at all. And we need to make so people don't lose food stamps, SSI, SSDI, ECT by working a little to much but no where near what they can get my not working at all. Also we don't people who say I will just take the basic and not kill my self pulling the 80+ work week.
Problem solved: (Score:2)
Just breed an army of smart apes to counter them.
How do you know I'm not a cyborg? (Score:2)
Robots are yesterday's news.
We grow human tissues and organs here at the UW.
We are where the surgery robot in Ender's Game came from.
Others try.
We DO.
Please send in the robots! (Score:2)
I for one will welcome robots and will welcome them eagerly. One I want to shovel snow. One to drive my car while I get a few extra minutes for sleep. And one more to mow my lawn (yes I know several has been invented, but cannot be distributed due to legal concerns).
Notice it?!?! (Score:2)
Why didn't they buy iRobot? (Score:2)
What's interesting is that Google didn't buy iRobot. They have actual finished product. Boston Dynamics just has DARPA-funded research projects all of which are merely that without the über power source.
iRobot also funded by DARPA (Score:3)
At least half of the military robots are built by iRobot. They make plenty of money working for the government, which is how they had the extra capital to develop the Roomba. iRobot is "smarter" than Boston Dynamics because they had the business acumen to see that their R&D could also be used for consumer products.
My guess is that Google didn't buy iRobot because they are building small/clever/cute robots, while BD is making large, scary, terminator style bots. BD wants to make the soldier of the future
Still with the Roomba? (Score:3)
It's just about the most trivial "robot" you can imagine, it's been around for over a decade, and in that time, there hasn't been a single new development in the "robotic home automation" market that it was supposed to usher in.
It's just a silly gimmick - it does a good enough job of vacuuming your Cheetos crumbs (though not nearly as well as getting off your ass for 5 minutes would), and that's about it.
The Survival Manual (Score:2)
I hope so, can't wait. (Score:2)
Let the robots rise. My job is not in danger, so I don't fear robots, and I am sure robots are easier to deal with than humans, who are stubborn, lazy, prone to lying and rarely friendly.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Reminds me of Manna (Score:4, Interesting)
http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm
Re:Reminds me of Manna (Score:5, Interesting)
Too bad parent posted AC, because that short story [marshallbrain.com] is the absolute best futurist discussion of the topic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:I for one (Score:4, Insightful)
" The more the robots take over, the more people will be unemployed"
Sigh. This just isn't how the economy or unemployment works. In economic terms, robots are simply one type of capital. Technology has been improving the efficiency of capital essentially for ever. Its true that if you increase your capital, you need less labour to achieve a given result. But since the labour is available, what we do instead is combine it with the now greater capital to make *more*, thus making us richer.
Your assumptions are also flawed. First, companies own most of the capital not individuals. Secondly you're assuming that you need to
combine that capital with HUMAN labor for it to work. What happens when a company can combine their capital with 100% robotic labor.
If I can buy 100 robots and make and sell widgets all by myself what incentive do I have to employ human labor at all?
Yes, robots can be considered capital but it's naive to assume that they can't also be counted on the labor side.
Re: (Score:2)
You are missing a fundamental flaw in the reasoning. Technology (in this case "robots") is as good as the human that designed it. There will always be work in researching, designing and building new and more efficient technology. Even if certain task become feasible to automate, the higher level tasks will still be done by humans. There will never be a situation in which humans do no work at all. There will be a time when humans do not need to do any physical task unless they want to. But that is not some f
Re: (Score:2)
Dear robots,
Please take out the above human first.
Thank You
Re: (Score:2)
With robotics, labor costs are the same in both locations.
So that means shipping costs are a larger factor.
Re: (Score:2)
Environmental compliance becomes a huge issue too. Also power generation and clean water costs.