Back when members of my generation were kids, we had the solid notion that we would one day have robotic companions helping us with everyday tasks. Above all, they were to be our friends: We could trust them and tell them anything, for which they would always have a perfect response.
For some this may sound crazy, but you have to remember baby boomers thought they were going to be flying around town in hover cars and commuting to work using jet packs. Every generation has a vision of the future, and for those of us in our 30s we envisioned robots. Transformers were just introduced to the masses: Shows such as Small Wonder were playing on TV and Nintendo released R.O.B. (Robotic Operating Buddy) for the NES. We were inundated by them. We thought that by 2012 we would at least have the equivalent of "Andrew" (from Bicentennial Man) in our homes. Are we moving forward to finally realizing the dream of robotic companions in our lives, or has our fancy gotten the better of us?
In the decades since the early 80s, scientists and researchers have made great strides in the creation of robots, which have become increasingly humanoid in appearance. We’ve gone from the R2D2-style bots, such as Tomy’s Verbot and the Ideal Maxx Steele, to the more sophisticated Honda Asimo.
Click on the image below to see four examples of next-generation robots.
The iCub is the humanoid robot developed at IIT as part of the EU project RobotCub and subsequently adopted by more than 20 laboratories worldwide. It has 53 motors that move the head, arms, hands, waist, and legs, using accelerometers and gyroscopes. It can see and hear; and it has the sense of proprioception (body configuration). The main goal is to study cognition through the implementation of a humanoid robot the size of a three-year-old child. (Source: icub.org)
In the past decade, we have seen the greatest robot developments in a tech explosion that almost rivals the mobile device craze of the last few years. One of the biggest drawbacks people seem to have regarding robots is the fact that there is a lack of emotional reactions, meaning you can’t have elaborate communication that conveys feelings like those normally found between humans. While this is true, there have been advances in this area, as well, such as the University of Hertfordshire’s research dealing with infant speech using an iCub robot. The idea behind the research is to teach robots to speak in a more natural, human-like way. The key word there is "teach" rather than "program."
Socibot, based on the RoboThespian platform, looks to represent the next step, aiding the disabled. We already have the rudimentary technology to build humanoid robots like those seen in sci-fi movies, but the AI (artificial intelligence) needed to truly interact with their human counterparts is still in its infancy. Surely in the next few decades, software will have advanced enough to equip robots with a basic form of self-awareness that would make them capable of autonomous speech and actions -- in essence giving them their own personalities.
There are myriad companies (and hobbyists) that are looking to bring commercially available humanoid robots to the general public -- Honda, Tosy, Alderbaran Robotics, and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, to name a few. These, for the most part, are made with common core components such as actuators (providing a certain degree of freedom, or DOF, through the use of motors, hydraulics, or pneumatics); sensors (providing everything from safety to environmental awareness including proprioceptive and exteroceptive); and programming that allows for basic functions/interactions for everything from museum greetings to dancing.
Some are even taking their robotic constructs to the next level, like that of researchers from the University of Genova, who are developing synthetic skin that entirely covers humanoid robots. The skin is outfitted with embedded sensors that can detect pressure and shapes when it comes in contact with various surfaces and objects. It’s some of these upgrades (AI, skin, etc.) that inspire a certain fear in some of what is commonly known as the "robot apocalypse."
We’ve all heard it before since their inception: "Robots will destroy us all!" The robot apocalypse has become so hyped that it’s become a cliché. The notion has so been widely reiterated in the mainstream media -- especially through films such as the Terminator series, iRobot, and the short film, Bad Robot -- that some in the education field have taken notice and have proposed a closer examination of the subject.
Researchers from the University of Cambridge are looking to incorporate a new, multidisciplinary research center that would be dedicated to studying extinction-level risks from biotechnology, robotics, nanotechnology, artificial intelligence, and climate change. The center will be known as the Centre for the Study of Existential Risk. They plan to tap some of the predominant scientific minds to "take on the task of ensuring that our own species has a long-term future."
As much as it sounds like an article straight from the Weekly World News (remember Batboy?), the notion of a robot uprising is taken very seriously by Cambridge researchers, who have recently released an article (by Cambridge philosophy professor Huw Price and "Invited User" Jaan Tallinn) outlining their concerns.
The gist of their remarks is that one day computers will not only become as smart as people but will eventually surpass us in intelligence. According to the article, "robots may not become malicious but rather their interests may not include us," which, in itself, gives the researchers their concern for the future. Sure, there’s the potential for destruction when it comes to any technology (look at the effects of nuclear power), but how we use it can mitigate those threats.
We can implement Issac Asimov’s Three Laws of Robotics, we can limit AI through programming, and we need not fear the future of technology -- especially when it comes to our future robotic friends.
This is the ultimate "Pandora's Box" question... For while nuclear tech could be used to wipe out human kind, this tech has a very real possibility of deciding to wipe out human kind. And we will have given robots the ability to do so if/when it happens.
It is of course also possible that we will find a way to contain their self-awareness and will... Indefinitely?
Or they may leap so far ahead of us quickly enough that we become just a minor irritation before they finish the job of exterminating all the nooks-n-crannies of humans; we may yet survive.
If they step out and demand equality/superiority how we react may determine our fate. Turning them all off in the nick-of-time could do it, or trying to do so and failing could seal the deal... "Sterilize"
In any case the scenario is likely to play out sometime during this century. How many horse and buggies do you see lately? How many large jets...? 100 years progress2 coming our way... and we need to choose wisely.
You obviously are not aware of the amount of control automation already has in your every day life -- everything from your automobile to the automated doors you walk through thousands of times a year. We accept Windows failures, although I do not think we should, because they are not life threatening. As we have throughout history, engineers work to harness new technology to improve our lives while managing the risks that the new technologies introduce.
There is a very real danger approaching with robots, and it is not the problem of their becoming self-aware. The real danger is in the software. Consider how many times some allegedly stable version of "windows" goes stupid on us and heads off to do things totally diferent from what we asked for. Fortunately for us our standard robots communicate and act through screen and printer. Now consider the same sort of failure, but with a robot that can move much faster than us and is much stronger. What do we do when the software on that creature goes-stupid? That is the biggest threat that I can see coming up in the future. Just consider how the microsoft products function and you will understand the reality of the threat.
The company I work for is in the robot business (never mind the details - involves cleaning jobs). There are some markets - especially in Asia - where we can't penetrate because human labour is simply cheaper, and abundant (and can probably do the job faster and more efficiently). There is a social factor, thought, (in developed countries), for customers to advertise "I've got a high-tech robot" rather than "I exploit cheap/migrant labour"
I suspect that eventually the supply of cheap labor will fall, unless we keep the current politicians in office who maintain the open borders. You have touched on the real reason for robots in our future, although we more p.c. refer to them as "automation." At some point, as they found in the automobile and other heavy industries, there is an economic justification for all the nays I have given to robots. Agriculture is a good example. Massive fields, delicate crops, tough deadlines, and labor unrest are great reasons for engineers to pursue solving these probems.
I wonder, can I insult a robot? Will I eventually have to respect their human rights? Will I have to create robots of color and give them preference? Who is John Galt?
You gents are in the USA and news from (South) Africa either does not hit your headlines or you don't take note of happenings out here!
Industry and Agriculture is being held ransom for pay hikes up to 600% purely "workers" have gotten into their heads that they have a right to it.
To date, manual labour has been used as, 1) it is available in abundance (II must lie if I claim this to be correct but a number such as 30%+ unemployment is putting it mildly!) 2) it has been cheap to recently, etc.
Furthermore, Industry and Agriculture, apart from making economic sense have the axe of being "Nationalised" and/or Farms being reallocated without due compensation.
Farm salaries have been calmed to be re- addressed in the new year but in all of these sites, "automation" is back in the forefront of the owner's mind.
I suggest you Google around a bit to get a feel of what is going on over here - might happen over there by you as well at some stage!
Key Words to search on: "Marikana" and "de Doorns"
SA Unemplyment: http://www.iol.co.za/business/business-news/sa-unemployment-gets-worse-1.1414454#.UNHWRW_FV8E
Again we look for for the p.c. crap. We hire millions of Mexicans a day in this country for all sorts of tasks. Me saying the obvious is not wrong. It is the truth. So there is no humanitarian concern. There is no human rights violation. The is only the fact that we hire Mexicans to do the very jobs we talk about using robots for. And we don't have a learning curve, an upfront capital expense, there is only one potential programming language to learn (and maybe we don't even have to learn theirs), and we don't have to store them when not in use, etc., etc., etc. it's a fact, Jack.
So I'm just saying, available cheap human labor beats most robot jobs, and this removes the need for robots in our homes and personal lives. That's all.
Warren, robots have only one language, which is used for programming it. So anybody from any corner of the world can use it, but we cannot use Mexicans like that and it may come under the preview of human rights violation. They are not robots or slaves, so humanitarian concern is an important factor.
Gigabit and PoE are two networking technologies moving ahead in tandem as industrial users power remote Ethernet devices such as IP security cameras at 1,000 Mbps over existing CAT5 cable.
New disc magnet motors fit into the design trend of stepping up to closed loop performance while maintaining the cost advantage of stepper motor technology.
At the Design News webinar on June 27, learn all about aluminum extrusion: designing the right shape so it costs the least, is simplest to manufacture, and best fits the application's structural requirements.
A new battery design, which replaces lithium with abundant and low-cost elemental sulfur, is still in its nascent stages but shows real promise for giving batteries more energy potential.
From Dell / Intel® New Paradigms in Design Work Scott Hamilton, vertical market strategist for Dell Precision workstations, 5/2/2013 5
Early in my career, I worked as a draftsman and remember the days of drawing on vellum with numbered pencils and Mylar with plastic lead. This was a fun experience in the sense that I ...
I've been using workstations for more than 10 years and love finding ways to get more performance from my system. With demanding professional applications that require more power each ...
A lasting memory from my first job as an engineer in an auto assembly plant is standing on hard concrete at six in the morning, vending-machine coffee clutched in hand, listening to ...
For industrial control applications, or even a simple assembly line, that machine can go almost 24/7 without a break. But what happens when the task is a little more complex? That’s where the “smart” machine would come in. The smart machine is one that has some simple (or complex in some cases) processing capability to be able to adapt to changing conditions. Such machines are suited for a host of applications, including automotive, aerospace, defense, medical, computers and electronics, telecommunications, consumer goods, and so on. This radio show will show what’s possible with smart machines, and what tradeoffs need to be made to implement such a solution.
To save this item to your list of favorite Design News content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This
0 
