Putting humanoid features on a robot is like slapping lipstick on a pig. The basic reason someone would want to do so is to do "human" things to the robot (i.e. FOA, dancing, etc. >;-D). Other than that we already have six billion expert humans out there being human so why compound the problem by adding even more "humans". Leave robots looking like machines so they can be functionally simpler and humans can enjoy the luxury of beating one into scrap with a baseball bat when it makes us angry.
I think the real issue, like most design issues, is the purpose of the humanoid robot. It might be a good thing if it is being sent into a dangerous situation where no human could go to rescue somebody since it might help to, say, comfort a scared child if it looks human rather than industrial. On the other hand, if it's just clean your floor for you, I have no use for all the extra "stuff".
Engineers at Fuel Cell Energy have found a way to take advantage of a side reaction, unique to their carbonate fuel cell that has nothing to do with energy production, as a potential, cost-effective solution to capturing carbon from fossil fuel power plants.
To get to a trillion sensors in the IoT that we all look forward to, there are many challenges to commercialization that still remain, including interoperability, the lack of standards, and the issue of security, to name a few.
This is part one of an article discussing the University of Washington’s nationally ranked FSAE electric car (eCar) and combustible car (cCar). Stay tuned for part two, tomorrow, which will discuss the four unique PCBs used in both the eCar and cCars.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.