Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Robotics The Almighty Buck

Uber Hires a Robot To Patrol Its Parking Lot and It's Way Cheaper Than a Security Guard (fusion.net) 263

Posted by msmash from the humans-need-not-apply dept.
Fusion's Kashmir Hill is reporting about a five-foot-tall, white, egg-shaped robot that one can find at the company's inspection lot near Mission Bay in San Francisco. The K5 robot is a stand-in for a human security guard, and it sports multiple high-definition cameras for 360-degree vision, a thermal camera, a laser rangefinder, a weather sensor, a license-plate recognition camera, four microphones, and person recognition capabilities. The report adds:If someone suspicious comes into the lot, or starts messing with a car, the robot can't tase them or break out any weapons. Instead the robot can set off an alarm, send a signal to human security personnel, and record everything that person does to be used against them later by police. Customers of Knightscope, the company that manufactures the aforementioned robot don't buy the machines. They rent them, usually two at a time, so one can charge its battery while the other patrols. The cost is $7 an hour. "For the cost of a single-shift security guard, you get a machine that will patrol for 24 hours a day 7 days a week," said Stephens, citing wages of $25 to $35 hour for a human security guard.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Uber Hires a Robot To Patrol Its Parking Lot and It's Way Cheaper Than a Security Guard More

Uber Hires a Robot To Patrol Its Parking Lot and It's Way Cheaper Than a Security Guard

Comments Filter:

  • Sounds good... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by muffen ( 321442 ) on Tuesday July 05, 2016 @12:30PM (#52449621)
    Putting aside "we-will-all-be-replaced-by-robots-soon", this is actually a good idea, and the company making them has the right strategy; much better to charge an hourly rent instead of a huge upfront fee!

    Apart from the employment issue, I can see a lot of benefits, robots aren't racist and robots aren't rude, and I assume security to actually be better with the robots in place.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by H3lldr0p ( 40304 )

      Here's a question: Who assumes the liability?

      The programming isn't going to be perfect. I'd be surprised if it's even considered "good". At some point, the biometrics are going to fail and someone is going to be detained on a false alarm. Deus help Uber if that person gets hurt in any way. Or tased by the robot.

      In that foreseeable situation who's at fault? The company behind the software? The company behind the robot? Uber for deploying the robot? Would Uber be smart enough for the contract to say that the

      • Well fortunately, these robots can't tased or detain anyone but to answer your question it should be like anything else. Robot harms me or crashes into my car. I sue the person that rented the robot and whose property I had my car parked at. They can turn around and sue the robot company if they want but I have no written or implied contracted between myself and the robot company.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      I think the solution is to build a wall, to keep all these robots out.

    • Putting aside "we-will-all-be-replaced-by-robots-soon", this is actually a good idea, and the company making them has the right strategy; much better to charge an hourly rent instead of a huge upfront fee!

      It's the right strategy from the customers point of view... but TANSTAAFL. From the businesses point of view it's problematic because they lay out the cash cost of the robot upfront but only receive income in a trickle.

    • ...robots aren't racist...

      Yeah, but notice that they hired the WHITE egg-shaped robot!

  • Can't do stairs (Score:3)

    by Joe_Dragon ( 2206452 ) on Tuesday July 05, 2016 @12:32PM (#52449647)

    Can't do stairs

    • Re:Can't do stairs (Score:5, Funny)

      by Fire_Wraith ( 1460385 ) on Tuesday July 05, 2016 @12:36PM (#52449705)
      It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, unless you go up a flight of stairs.

    • Re:Can't do stairs (Score:5, Insightful)

      by aicrules ( 819392 ) on Tuesday July 05, 2016 @12:39PM (#52449729)
      Fortunately most cars aren't parked in stairwells. Therefore security robot can still do its job.

      • and the bad guys can use the stairs in the parking lot to get away also some parking lot's steep ramps in them.

        • Anyone can 'get away' from the robot. It has no ability to stop them. All it does is roam around, take pictures, and call for help.

          In a lot of ways it isn't much more than a roaming camera with some smart abilities for generating alerts so that people don't need to monitor it.

          Running up a flight of stairs doesn't really impede that. Given that the robot is designed to chase off criminals even if you run up the stairs it's done its job.

        • I can get away from most parking lot security. They really aren't there to apprehend a suspect. Just to deter and maybe call the cops when something happens.

  • snow (Score:2, Interesting)

    by CaptainStumpy ( 1132145 )
    1. wait for SF to deploy these in all major parking locations
    2. wait a few years for snow....http://snowbrains.com/san-francisco-ca-rarely-see-snow/
    3. break into everything while the useless 400 sensor robot can't get to or from its charging station
    4. profit

  • Waiting for the day (Score:3)

    by Dunbal ( 464142 ) * on Tuesday July 05, 2016 @12:35PM (#52449691)
    That day when someone steals the security robot...

  • Hires? (Score:2)

    by Holi ( 250190 )
    A robot is not an employee, it is a tool. You don't hire robots, you put them in service.

    • Hire is also used as synonym of rent. Eg: She hired a dress for her wedding. These guys rent robots. Hire is a perfectly fine word to use.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Holi ( 250190 )
        Ok, but I still think it is a poor choice of words, when a more appropriate (and understandable) term would be leases.
  • So I bring something to jam it's radio signal and then beat into parts. By the time they find it I am long gone. No muss no fuss no evidence pointing to me.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by wbr1 ( 2538558 )
      Any dev worth his salt would have it send a constant stream of time/location stamps. The receiving end would alert/alarm when those stop. On top of which. if the bot has a hardened area for storage, it should keep recording. So, even without the live feed, if the crooks go to tamper or disable it, there could still be a record.

    • Except for the footage stored and the internal hard drive, or were you planning on staying around long enough to pry it open and find it?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Holi ( 250190 )
        Did you read my comment? "Beat it into parts". I know what a hard drive looks like, shouldn't be too hard to find.

        • I'm sorry. I assumed 'beat it into parts' was hyperbole. Just what exactly are you planning on using to beat it into parts? Assuming the hard drive is reasonably secured you aren't going to be 'long gone' by the time security shows up. You're still going to be smashing it trying to get at the hard drive when they show up. Sure, you know what a hard drive looks like, but in which of the battleship grey 1/4" tempered steel boxes is it in? Going to grab them all? Well, if I were to design the system I would p

  • until the thieves steal the robot? I mean, faraday cage the thing, bring it to a metal warehouse, dismantle and sell it's parts. Easily enough done and at the same time you can be stealing the cars in the lot the robot used to patrol.

    • The Faraday cage is NOT 'easily enough done', nor will selling the parts be easy.

      Without the faraday cage, you get arrested before you make it home.

    • I suppose the security company could sound the alarm if the contact with the robot is broken. That would be effective against both faraday cages and signal jammers...

  • If a robot costs $7/hour to rent, and you need two of them (for battery changes), that's $122K/year for 24x7 coverage.

    Is this roving robot better than blanketing the lot with fixed security cameras? (other than acting as a honeypot to attract people that want to mess with the robot) Whatever logic the robot uses to determine if something warrants an alarm could be applied to the fixed camera feed as well. And you have fewer blind spots since the robot can't see what's happening over in the next row of cars

    • Robots have better ability to examine things closely. Security cameras often have major limitations on what they see. For example, typically they can only read license plates if the car is in a specific location (i.e. the entrance/exit). They can't see what's going on everywhere, and can be blocked.

      Assume someone rents a big van, enters the lot, parks his van in front of the camera. Get out on the other side (protected by the van), and proceeds to break into a trunk, plants some evidence, or perhaps a G

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by hawguy ( 1600213 )

        Robots have better ability to examine things closely. Security cameras often have major limitations on what they see. For example, typically they can only read license plates if the car is in a specific location (i.e. the entrance/exit). They can't see what's going on everywhere, and can be blocked.

        Assume someone rents a big van, enters the lot, parks his van in front of the camera. Get out on the other side (protected by the van), and proceeds to break into a trunk, plants some evidence, or perhaps a GPS tracker, removes the radio, etc. No one can ever tell what happened. The robot avoids this issue.

        But won't the big van also block the little robot (assuming it doesn't just run over the robot).

        If this robot can read license plates, then a pole mounted PTZ camera can also read license plates, but unlike the robot that can only be one place at one time, cameras are cheap enough that they can be mounted throughout the lot. (1 year of robot rental is $120K, that's a lot of cameras).

    • As noted, it's a mobile camera. The big advantage comes from liability and HR savings. You write and tweak an algorithm, and then the little robot does it. Follows a set path, semi-random path, whatever. Doesn't get tired, doesn't get bored, doesn't skip looking somewhere because nobody would hide there. "Remembers" every last detail in a manner that's reproducible in court. If anything happens to the robot, you just upload the work algorithm into the new one, charge it up, and let it go. If the robot misse

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by hawguy ( 1600213 )

        As noted, it's a mobile camera. The big advantage comes from liability and HR savings. You write and tweak an algorithm, and then the little robot does it. Follows a set path, semi-random path, whatever. Doesn't get tired, doesn't get bored, doesn't skip looking somewhere because nobody would hide there. "Remembers" every last detail in a manner that's reproducible in court. If anything happens to the robot, you just upload the work algorithm into the new one, charge it up, and let it go. If the robot misses something, tweak the algorithm and redeploy.

        That doesn't really answer my question - why is a roving robot (which can only see a portion of the parking lot at a time) better than dozens of fixed and/or PTZ cameras that are overlooking the entire lot all the time? Any algorithm that the robot uses to detect bad behavior could also be applied to the fixed cameras, with the PTZ's used to zoom in on suspicious behavior for more detail.

  • But you need other security personnel to actually triage the situation. And, if those other personnel aren't on-site, a criminal just needs to know what their response time is and plan accordingly.

    This isn't going to deter real criminals - once the novelty wears off, it'll likely be less effective than a human. It probably will help with mindless vandalism, though... well, probably not. It WILL help catch them after the fact.

    Like a lot of things we read about here, this tech is currently rather half baked.

    • But it'll eventually get there, and we (as a society) really need to be discussing how we're going to handle that new world where most jobs have been automated.

      Challenge accepted!

      Automation is about pushing more wealth to the ruling class and minimizing unavoidable costs. Every time a job like this gets automated, displaced workers head to another employment pool. As those pools get crowded, the salaries go down.

      "Plumbers will always make a good living."

      "Until the displaced security guards get mini

  • You can get a permit for outfitting it with some kind of area-denial device within your presumably fenced and clearly marked property.

    If it can emit a painful ultrasonic shriek, fire off an omni-directional microwave that makes your skin feel like it's on fire, or blink a bajillion-candle strobe in your face to temporarily blind you... then it's suddenly useful.

    • If it can emit a painful ultrasonic shriek, fire off an omni-directional microwave that makes your skin feel like it's on fire, or blink a bajillion-candle strobe in your face to temporarily blind you... then it's suddenly useful.

      Or accidentally bump that laser "rangefinder" up several watts... hey, we were just trying to determine distance to target!

  • steal the robot (Score:3)

    by avandesande ( 143899 ) on Tuesday July 05, 2016 @01:33PM (#52450317) Journal
    part it out on ebay
  • Which is to deprive some family of their income to increase corporate profits regardless of the detrimental impacts to society. All hail our corporate overlords.

  • Cost shouldn't be the primary stat (Score:4, Insightful)

    by watermark ( 913726 ) on Tuesday July 05, 2016 @01:48PM (#52450473)

    A chicken with a badge would also cost less than a human security guard. Cost alone is not a great stat to compare competing solutions. How well does the robot do it's job compared to a human guard?

  • Use whatever id card to let the robot know you are not a suspicious person. It has to have some information for its basis of whether this is a suspicious situation/person or not. For best effect, get a locksmith or mechanic ID which allows you to choose any car in the lot. On your way out run the roving camera down or steal it.

  • optimistic (Score:3)

    by argStyopa ( 232550 ) on Tuesday July 05, 2016 @02:04PM (#52450679) Journal

    $25-$35 for a security guard?
    Last time I checked, security guards were paid pretty much minimum wage, with armed security not a great deal more.

    Note that this ISN'T even a security guard, this is simply a mobile alarm system that will call security - which you'd still have to have on hand. Sure, it would be a force multiplier, but I also see this silly thing being easily gamed.

  • What's the actual cost of the machine and how many hours of uptime is its cost spread over to get "$7/hour".

    You can also have a $200,000 Ferrari for only $4.60/hour so long as you commit to paying that price every hour for 5 years.
  • Does it respond to the name Alexa? :D

  • I'm disappointed (Score:3)

    by Cro Magnon ( 467622 ) on Tuesday July 05, 2016 @02:45PM (#52451119) Homepage Journal

    When I saw the title, I was hoping for an ED-209.

  • How can any human security company compete with this? they are held to a min wage, This is lower then that wage in effect cutting out all human competition.

  • Automating the primary tasks of a security guard were never difficult. A bunch of mounted cameras can do all of that.

    Humans have always been better in two very important aspects. The first is the flexibility to handle something weird -- without completely losing functionality. Maybe that comes in the form of duct tape over the camera lense, or a bright flashlight into robot's lenses, or a bucket of water, or spray paint.

    But the biggest reason for a human security guard has nothing to do with the human at

  • I want to steal it. (Score:3)

    by hey! ( 33014 ) on Tuesday July 05, 2016 @09:02PM (#52453613) Homepage Journal

    I have no use for one, but something about the thing makes me want to throw a conductive blanket over it to muffle its RF output, then throw the helpless thing in the back of a pickup truck and whisk it away.

Slashdot Top Deals

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Close