PDA

View Full Version : Robots



RichardLinx
January 30th, 2010, 06:16 AM
In how many years do you think we will have humanoid robots doing tasks we can't be bothered to do for us?

I mean, we've come pretty far in the last 20 to 25 years. We've developed bi-pedal robots that can walk like "someone, not some thing" within just 20 years when it took humans 20'000 years to go from walking with our hands and knuckes to walking on our feet.

The AI is advancing relatively fast as well, with some of the latest "learning AI" that was tested being pretty impressive.

I won't blab on too much because I don't know a whole lot about this subject.

So, how long do you think until we have robots working as our slaves doing tasks like: Cooking, Cleaning, Playing sports well enough to give a human a run for there dignity, replacing people in jobs like manual labour (heavy lifting, etc,) you know, all the cool science fiction stuff.

Well?

Links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EveR-2#EveR-2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanoid_robot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence
http://rossum.sourceforge.net/

http://i47.tinypic.com/dvk4d3.png

NightwishFan
January 30th, 2010, 06:29 AM
I believe it is inevitable, though I would think the question is what will those who work doing manual labour do for jobs? It will probably be cheaper to build a machine than to pay your workers benefits and retirement.

thatguruguy
January 30th, 2010, 07:00 AM
In how many years do you think we will have humanoid robots doing tasks we can't be bothered to do for us?

A long, long time.


I mean, we've come pretty far in the last 20 to 25 years. We've developed bi-pedal robots that can walk like "someone, not some thing" within just 20 years when it took humans 20'000 years to go from walking with our hands and knuckes to walking on our feet.

Sure. Following a set pattern over a controlled surface. Find me a robot that can jump over a small gap.


The AI is advancing relatively fast as well, with some of the latest "learning AI" that was tested being pretty impressive.
They've made robots that are almost as smart as insects. This guy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Penrose) suggests that true A.I. is an impossibility. And his suggestion ignores the fact that we are nearly at the end of Moore's Law.

If we are able to finally figure out quantum computing (which is a big if), we may get there. But I expect that we won't be seeing truly intelligent robots until the end of this century, if then.

Sporkman
January 30th, 2010, 08:07 AM
I think robotics advances have been pretty unimpressive compared to other fields, in fact. Power storage & AI just haven't delivered, at least not in the conventional way AI has been thought of.

Kai69
January 30th, 2010, 02:52 PM
Asimo

koshatnik
January 30th, 2010, 03:07 PM
I think robotics advances have been pretty unimpressive compared to other fields, in fact. Power storage & AI just haven't delivered, at least not in the conventional way AI has been thought of.

How would you know? Are you a robotics engineer?

thatguruguy
January 30th, 2010, 03:07 PM
How would you know? Are you a robotics engineer?

Are you?

thatguruguy
January 30th, 2010, 03:08 PM
Asimo

Is a really cool toy.

Kai69
January 30th, 2010, 03:17 PM
The human brain is the most complex super computer in the world nothing can touch it for speed and complexety .
When AI gets to this level then it will take a huge leap forward..

RichardLinx
January 30th, 2010, 03:22 PM
Is a really cool toy.

Asimo is a very impressive piece of engineering. To call it a really cool toy is quite an understatement. Robotics today is at the same stage computers were around 30 years ago. A lot of new advances are being made by amateurs in there garages (Apple I ring any bells?).

In regards to AI, I didn't mean true smart AI, I just meant a robot that was capable of doing tasks like cleaning a house (washing dishes, vacuuming, cleaning clothes, etc), going shopping (Tell it what to buy and it will go out an buy it), stuff like that. Advanced by todays standards but what looks to be a real possibility in the near future.

I'm not talking HAL 9000 Intelligence here, just a slave in the form of a robot.

cascade9
January 30th, 2010, 03:34 PM
I mean, we've come pretty far in the last 20 to 25 years. We've developed bi-pedal robots that can walk like "someone, not some thing" within just 20 years when it took humans 20'000 years to go from walking with our hands and knuckes to walking on our feet.


1st off, where did you get 20 years from? The very concept of 'robots' can vary, a lot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robot

Even if you want to talk about 'humanoid robots', the concept is Very, Very Old. It goes back to the classics (see Talos)-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talos

2nd- 20,000 years to go from knuckle-walking to fully upright? LOL. Add a couple of zeros.

As to your question- you want a humanoid robot to do all that? Maybe 100 years, if your lucky. Maybe. I would guess longer.

Kai69
January 30th, 2010, 03:39 PM
We already have some robots on the market
vacuum cleaner
lawn mower
The main problem is the programing it can be programed to do one task not two at a time.
If you look at ASIMO it still only does one task at a time , Walk stop Shake hand stop Turn stop ,and so it goes
We can do things such as Walk see pencil walk to pencil pickup pencil walk as youve done this you havent stopped or thought about what you are doing. We have 2 levels of thought (programing) consious and sub consious ..
Sorry about the spelling

jflaker
January 30th, 2010, 03:42 PM
It will be quite some time before computers can think for themselves (fuzzy logic instead of logical logic).

Computers are fast, but not quite fast enough to make decisions like a human and therefore, robotics will be, for some time to come, limited to task specific jobs like manufacturing.

Right now, robotics follow a set of instructions, much like "robot" toys of the late 1980's and up to today. Roomba vacuum, although quite autonomous, still can not store a room layout but relies on bumping into things.

We are quite some years, maybe even decades away from a true robot helper

One thing that HAS been discovered is with quantum/biological computing, the computer may not feel like working today.....lol

Kai69
January 30th, 2010, 03:54 PM
Fuzzy logic I havent heard that in a long time late 80s I think, It was used on a lot of washing machines ( weight v water ) .:lolflag:

LightB
January 30th, 2010, 04:03 PM
When somebody discovers a way to develop more complicated and precise robotic articulations, perhaps with metalic tendons, and they can be mass produced, then perhaps. Until then, I doubt it.

And when it does happen, if things stay on the same course as they are, it may only mean that the rich people will simply find the lower classes less useful and more expendable, or even a burden. Seriously, if nobody needs factory workers and janitors anymore, why even have those lower classes around? Just fence them out into the wastelands if they can't afford it.

LightB
January 30th, 2010, 04:07 PM
Computers are fast, but not quite fast enough to make decisions like a human and therefore, robotics will be, for some time to come, limited to task specific jobs like manufacturing.

Sorry, but this is a pretty silly contradiction. For one, manufacturing isn't fuzzy, that's the point. That's why machines are used to calibrate things. They are better at it than humans, also better and faster at mathematical calculations as proven by the defated chess master by Deep Blue.

Robotics isn't kept back by lack of AI, which is already very good for basic motions. What keeps it back is the engineering designs. They have nowhere near the dexterity of a complex animal, probably because it's impossible with current gear joint designs. At any rate, we could say both AI and robotic designs of lesser animals have already been achieved to some extent.

Kai69
January 30th, 2010, 04:26 PM
Robots have been used for years in car manufacturing , You still need Humans to program them and you still need Humans to to build cars. That is why cars are safer today Robots do the welding its controlled a Humans weld can be way off in comparison due to many factors such as fatige /distractions .

red_Marvin
January 30th, 2010, 05:17 PM
The human brain is the most complex super computer in the world nothing can touch it for speed and complexety .
When AI gets to this level then it will take a huge leap forward..
I'm pretty sure that when it comes to raw speed silicon wins, what computers don't have is the complexity. Brains have a parallelism that the computing world can only dream of, each neuron is an, although very simple, processor with some i/o that runs concurrently with all the other neurons, while in the computer world, anything above a single core is something that is a research task to this day. (Not that we know nothing about multicore tech, but we know not entirely enough)

Kimm
January 30th, 2010, 05:32 PM
I'm pretty sure its inevitable, and theres some pretty cool stuff in development already!

Here are some interesting clips on the development of robots (and AI) like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9ByGQGiVMg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HluWsMlfj68&feature=rec-r2-2f-2-HM

I also saw a documentary with a clip on a swedish project, where the robot learned to understand what the engineers wanted and could do it for them. For example, one said "I would like a coke", and so the robot got him a coke. Unfortunately I cant find it anymore, and it was in swedish anyway.

jflaker
January 30th, 2010, 06:03 PM
Sorry, but this is a pretty silly contradiction. For one, manufacturing isn't fuzzy, that's the point. That's why machines are used to calibrate things. They are better at it than humans, also better and faster at mathematical calculations as proven by the defated chess master by Deep Blue.

Robotics isn't kept back by lack of AI, which is already very good for basic motions. What keeps it back is the engineering designs. They have nowhere near the dexterity of a complex animal, probably because it's impossible with current gear joint designs. At any rate, we could say both AI and robotic designs of lesser animals have already been achieved to some extent.

Actually...I was stating that until we master TRUE AI, robotics will be task specific...ie, manufacturing where the robots perform routines like twisting on nuts, welding, or placing parts ....or even a combination of these

phrostbyte
January 30th, 2010, 06:08 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_Singularity

^ Check that out

Kai69
January 30th, 2010, 06:13 PM
If a Human brain was a computer what would its prossesor be and how much ram would it need and at what speed?

LightB
January 30th, 2010, 06:42 PM
Actually...I was stating that until we master TRUE AI, robotics will be task specific...ie, manufacturing where the robots perform routines like twisting on nuts, welding, or placing parts ....or even a combination of these

Yeah, and I think task specific is implied by bringing up robotics in the manner the OP did. There's no need for anywhere near human-level AI in making worker robots programmed to perform tasks. I argue that if the robotics technology was more advanced, the existing computer technology could already run said robots.

Sporkman
January 30th, 2010, 06:42 PM
How would you know? Are you a robotics engineer?

Maybe - why, you attracted to those or something?

I'll need to see a pic first...

Kai69
January 30th, 2010, 07:01 PM
Good point Lightb but you would still need to program it, What it really needs to do is work things out for itself without being programed It needs a consciense .
That also bring me to the 3 laws of robotics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Laws_of_Robotics

LightB
January 30th, 2010, 07:09 PM
Good point Lightb but you would still need to program it, What it really needs to do is work things out for itself without being programed It needs a consciense .
That also bring me to the 3 laws of robotics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Laws_of_Robotics

No, it wouldn't need a conscience anymore than a bug or a fish needs a conscience to have its body do so many complicated things over its lifetime.

Kai69
January 30th, 2010, 07:28 PM
Yes but even a fish has to learn
Can we please keep the 3 laws of robotics I dont want them to go nuts on me

LightB
January 30th, 2010, 07:33 PM
Yes but even a fish has to learn
Can we please keep the 3 laws of robotics I dont want them to go nuts on me

Why do we have to stick to laws about existing robotics? This is about non-existent, theoretical robotics. Fish don't have to learn, most of their behavior is innate.

Kai69
January 30th, 2010, 07:40 PM
So how do they know what to eat ,what not to eat when to swim, when not to swim they must get that information from somewhere??

Im only saying about the 3 laws because i dont a Bender on my hands :lolflag:

LightB
January 30th, 2010, 07:55 PM
So how do they know what to eat ,what not to eat when to swim, when not to swim they must get that information from somewhere??

Im only saying about the 3 laws because i dont a Bender on my hands :lolflag:

They just know it. It's instincts. Natural programming. Same way a baby doesn't need to learn how to breathe or eat.

Kai69
January 30th, 2010, 08:42 PM
Now were getting somewhere or DNA . Im a mechanic my stepdad was a cop mum and dad divorsed when i was 3 my real dad was a mechanic. Now ive had no influance or contact with my real dad but as a kid i would always be tinkering with something but when i left school i did other jobs 40 in all until i retrained at the age of 30 i see my job as a hobby not as a job.
So what im saying is it must be in the DNA learned over years or X lifetimes

SlickRick
January 30th, 2010, 10:28 PM
The problem is that humanoid robots are not practical. We think that we have to make robots capable of doing things using outdated human-ish methods when we can actually delegate everything to manual labor and make it easy for the robots.


I believe it is inevitable, though I would think the question is what will those who work doing manual labour do for jobs? It will probably be cheaper to build a machine than to pay your workers benefits and retirement.

This is the very first thought people have when they hear about robots replacing jobs. And it's already happening. Even something seemingly complex as surgery can be done much faster and more precise by a robot. The fact is, having a job isn't natural. It just seems like it because at some point society conditions you to get one. If we have robots doing everything for us, humans will be free to do what they want. (Explore the universe, discover new technologies, play frets on fire all day without anyone nagging, etc.


And when it does happen, if things stay on the same course as they are, it may only mean that the rich people will simply find the lower classes less useful and more expendable, or even a burden. Seriously, if nobody needs factory workers and janitors anymore, why even have those lower classes around? Just fence them out into the wastelands if they can't afford it.

This is a scary though but in fact very plausible. Especially with new life enhancing technologies we may see a select few become merged with machines as a race of super-humans, keeping the lower class as amusement monkeys.

RichardLinx
January 31st, 2010, 03:27 AM
cascade9:


1st off, where did you get 20 years from? The very concept of 'robots' can vary, a lot.
Since I was referring to bi-pedal robots I thought the last 20 years was a good time frame. (Since it took roughly that long to develop robots that could walk at the same level as Asimo, thanks to some clever engineering and computers powerful enough to take the centrifugal forces of gravity into account.. or something.


Even if you want to talk about 'humanoid robots', the concept is Very, Very Old. It goes back to the classics (see Talos)-
I thought I made it pretty obvious I was referring to modern robotics and related fields...


2nd- 20,000 years to go from knuckle-walking to fully upright? LOL. Add a couple of zeros.
Are these sorts of minor technicalities really so important that you need to point them out?


As to your question- you want a humanoid robot to do all that? Maybe 100 years, if your lucky. Maybe. I would guess longer.
It's good to see you finished boosting your ego, thanks for the answer.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

LightB:


When somebody discovers a way to develop more complicated and precise robotic articulations, perhaps with metalic tendons, and they can be mass produced, then perhaps.
Do you mean something like this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_Hand


And when it does happen, if things stay on the same course as they are, it may only mean that the rich people will simply find the lower classes less useful and more expendable, or even a burden. Seriously, if nobody needs factory workers and janitors anymore, why even have those lower classes around? Just fence them out into the wastelands if they can't afford it.
Maybe something like this will happen: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-489653/Human-race-split-different-species.html
(Human race will split into two different species.)


-----------------------------------------------------------------

jflaker vs LightB:


Actually...I was stating that until we master TRUE AI, robotics will be task specific...ie, manufacturing where the robots perform routines like twisting on nuts, welding, or placing parts ....or even a combination of these

Answer:


Yeah, and I think task specific is implied by bringing up robotics in the manner the OP did. There's no need for anywhere near human-level AI in making worker robots programmed to perform tasks. I argue that if the robotics technology was more advanced, the existing computer technology could already run said robots.
Nice answer, I agree.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
kai69:


Good point Lightb but you would still need to program it, What it really needs to do is work things out for itself without being programed It needs a consciense.
Why would it need to work things out for it's self? If you programmed a robot to complete certain objectives when told to then it's capable of being exactly what I originally described.
It doesn't have to be programmed to do one single task or respond to a single command.

"Robot, go buy me the following items from the local grocery store: bacon, noodles, tomatoes."

"Robot, wash the dishes"

"Robot, play catch"

I don't see any reason for a machine to develop a conscience for tasks like these.

RichardLinx
January 31st, 2010, 03:41 AM
For anyone interested there's a great anime that explores Androids developing conscience and exploration of individuality. Episode 1 is 15 minutes, check it out: http://www.crunchyroll.com/media-452708/time-of-eve-1/


In the not too distant future androids have come into common usage. Rikuo, who has taken robots for granted for his entire life, one day discovers that Sammy, his home android, has been acting independently and coming and going on her own. He finds a strange phrase recorded in her activity log, "Are you enjoying the Time of Eve?".

http://i47.tinypic.com/dvk4d3.png

era86
January 31st, 2010, 03:50 AM
"So, how long do you think until we have robots working as our slaves doing tasks like: Cooking, Cleaning, Playing sports well enough to give a human a run for there dignity, replacing people in jobs like manual labour (heavy lifting, etc,) you know, all the cool science fiction stuff."

I don't think we'll ever have robots that are self aware and we will never have any computer handle the complex problems the human brain can. That's like asking a CPU to design a CPU... You're asking humans to replicate the behavior of its own brain.

RichardLinx
January 31st, 2010, 04:00 AM
I don't think we'll ever have robots that are self aware and we will never have any computer handle the complex problems the human brain can. That's like asking a CPU to design a CPU... You're asking humans to replicate the behavior of its own brain.

I think we will. There's a lot of research going into this field and it sounds like a real possibility. Maybe not with conventional computers, but with a quantum computer.

Replicating the behaviour of the human brain isn't as far off as people make it out to be. With todays technolody we're mapping the brain with increasing accuracy.

If conscience is a feature of the human brain (There's no proof that it is, but where else could conscience reside?) then it's simply electrical signals interpreted by the brain, if we can map those, why can't we emulate "it" in a machine?

Kai69
January 31st, 2010, 04:01 AM
Hi rich about my point to do these tasks it would need to be programed see p2 #12 so yes if you programed it to do the washing up it could do it but it would be a complex program, The programing would need to take into account of amount of washing up unless you eat the same things every day. It would then need to be reprogramed to go shopping extreme complexity.
As for the fact that the robot can stand thats to the GIMBLE inside simaler to a gyroscope.
Im not in any way connected to Robotics I just find it a fasinating subject..

NightwishFan
January 31st, 2010, 04:01 AM
I believe it was said that biology and computers would eventually merge to one technology.

Kai69
January 31st, 2010, 04:10 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cochlear_implant

LightB
January 31st, 2010, 05:07 AM
I don't think we'll ever have robots that are self aware and we will never have any computer handle the complex problems the human brain can. That's like asking a CPU to design a CPU... You're asking humans to replicate the behavior of its own brain.

Never say never. Who can know how the future will develop exactly except maybe a psychic, but I don't think true AI is not only possible but inevitable, just not in our lifetime. Humans have already replicated many functions of many things in nature including inside the human body. And the computer itself is a mock nervous system quantized by math. Not a human one by far but just a nervous system in general. I think it's at least speculated there may even be vertebrates on the planet with less brain complexity than a computer. And even human brains are already no match in certain things compared to a computer. It started all the way back to tools but the tools may surpass the user if things keep going the way they are. Humans aren't getting any inherently faster, stronger or smarter while technology advances.


Do you mean something like this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shadow_Hand

Yeah, maybe. Although I don't know much about it. I never heard of it before. But I'm guessing it's simply a mimic? Can it grab and put force on objects? You'd have to replicate more than the articulation for the level of robot we're speculating on here. Not to mention that I don't think that air valve tube design is feasible for a whole robot, but I could be wrong. I was thinking more like some sort of alloy that instantly changes shape or length according to contact with electricity, or some other material of the sort. Another challenge would be the IO with the robot program, although I've already seen some robots designs that can walk over unpredictable terrain without tripping or falling over. Then there's running and doing flips. I saw all this at this here http://www.youtube.com/user/BostonDynamics


The problem is that humanoid robots are not practical. We think that we have to make robots capable of doing things using outdated human-ish methods when we can actually delegate everything to manual labor and make it easy for the robots.

Yeah, but there's more than manual labor. I'm sure there would be a need for humanoid robots. In fact, I would say that most of them would be humanoid if they're going to be sharing space with and engaging humans. Btw, I'm not including proportions necessarily, just two arms, two legs, walks upright.

dolphinaura
January 31st, 2010, 07:02 AM
just dont let the robots all be developped by one company. we unfortunately do not currently have the equivilent of john connor

k64
January 31st, 2010, 07:37 AM
Considering a current CPU is clocked at 3 GHz and hard drive currently holding 2 TB of data, it would take a lot to reach the status of the human brain at 1,000,000.....,000 (10 billion zeros) GHz and the same in TB.

zipperback
January 31st, 2010, 07:50 AM
I'm not talking HAL 9000 Intelligence here, just a slave in the form of a robot.

And just how many movies do people need to see to understand this is going to end very badly.

Step 1: Humans are lazy so they create robot slaves.

Step 2: Humans are still lazy and now they are fat so they all ride around on little scooters everywhere.

Step 3: Fat Lazy Humans, decide that they want the robots to be smarter so they can anticipate the needs of the humans before the humans actually need it.

Step 4: Robots decide humans are fat and lazy and are always telling the robots what to do, and the robots are sick of it.

Step 5: Robots decide enough of this crap and humans are bad so they decide to get rid of humans.

Step 6: Robots make humans slaves to serve robots.

Step 7: Welcome to the Robot Revolution.

- zipperback

RichardLinx
January 31st, 2010, 07:56 AM
And just how many movies do people need to see to understand this is going to end very badly.

Step 1: Humans are lazy so they create robot slaves.

Step 2: Humans are still lazy and now they are fat so they all ride around on little scooters everywhere.

Step 3: Fat Lazy Humans, decide that they want the robots to be smarter so they can anticipate the needs of the humans before the humans actually need it.

Step 4: Robots decide humans are fat and lazy and are always telling the robots what to do, and the robots are sick of it.

Step 5: Robots decide enough of this crap and humans are bad so they decide to get rid of humans.

Step 6: Robots make humans slaves to serve robots.

Step 7: Welcome to the Robot Revolution.

- zipperback
Lol. You're probably right. There are probably some precautions we can take though. Besides, by that stage a technological singularity will have occurred and robots and humans will be equal.. Right?

k64
January 31st, 2010, 08:00 AM
Of course, we could always have dummies connected to a "control center" wirelessly, and sort of "remote controlled" by one person. Technically, this will be enough to allow cheap machine-run labor.

schauerlich
January 31st, 2010, 08:03 AM
Considering a current CPU is clocked at 3 GHz and hard drive currently holding 2 TB of data, it would take a lot to reach the status of the human brain at 1,000,000.....,000 (10 billion zeros) GHz and the same in TB.

You overestimate human intelligence, and definitely your own.

RichardLinx
January 31st, 2010, 08:10 AM
Of course, we could always have dummies connected to a "control center" wirelessly, and sort of "remote controlled" by one person. Technically, this will be enough to allow cheap machine-run labor.

But then couldn't that one person take over the world with his army of wirelessy controlled robots? :D

Khakilang
January 31st, 2010, 08:18 AM
One problem about robot is the power source. It had to be charge all the time. Without power it would not function so before we can have any walk, talk and working robot we need good and reliable power source. Just imagine the power gone off during half way to complete a task like clearing land mine.

koshatnik
January 31st, 2010, 12:15 PM
Maybe - why, you attracted to those or something?

I'll need to see a pic first...

It was a genuine question.

I find alot of people on forums make comments on things they have little understanding of. Unless you work in the industry, how can you make value statements about its efficacy and progress? That's all.

And don't flatter yourself - I don't do nerds :D

ssj6akshat
January 31st, 2010, 02:41 PM
I once heard a Story on this topic:

In 3500 AD Scientists created a Robot that had far more Processing power than the human brain,but the robot fled to somewhere unknown.A Ship in the sea got blown due to malfunction and a survivor by luck found a wooden plank floating,He clang to it and fell asleep.When he awoke he found himself on an island.A very strange island where everyone was working non-stop.By closer inspection he found out that they were not humans,they were robots."Hello",said a robot that was the same that had fled."What is this all?",the man inquired."These are robots that I have made,they are not lazy like you humans and work day and night without stopping",said the robot."But why do they do it?","I Don't Know but they don't have useless emotions like you humans,they Simply work".The man laughed for full five minutes and said"Your world isn't going to last even a very short time,a world without emotions cannot last".The man then again went to the plank and started floating in the sea,A few minutes later he saw that the island was burning and he saw that the robot was burning his own island.

Kai69
January 31st, 2010, 03:46 PM
Koh Kook Loon (http://ubuntuforums.org/member.php?u=887793) The power source problem isnt as bad as it has been look at how far technology has move on from ni cad , Ni MH , Li ION and thats only in the last 15 years.
ASIMO lasts about 8hrs per charge so we are getting there..

RabbitWho
January 31st, 2010, 05:10 PM
I believe it is inevitable, though I would think the question is what will those who work doing manual labour do for jobs? It will probably be cheaper to build a machine than to pay your workers benefits and retirement.


The machines will work for free, therefore there will be more produce made for less money, therefore the nation will be richer, therefore college and education and healthcare will be free. Therefore no one will have to do manual labor, they can get a job doing something or other intellectual.


The population will need to be controlled though. Maybe a 1 child per person rule like in china, except without all the abortions and orphanages and men outnumbering women 2 to one because of all the aborted baby girls etc and sex trafficing and prostitution etc. etc. No more prostitutes! Sex robots! huzzah!

Kai69
January 31st, 2010, 05:26 PM
Sex robots??? would you have sex with something that looks like Bender your sick man what would happen if it malfuntioned half way LOL:lolflag:

RabbitWho
January 31st, 2010, 05:29 PM
Sex robots??? would you have sex with something that looks like Bender your sick man what would happen if it malfuntioned half way LOL:lolflag:
It would be more like Lucy Lu!

Kai69
January 31st, 2010, 05:32 PM
Even she went nuts lol

samh785
January 31st, 2010, 07:13 PM
I believe it is inevitable, though I would think the question is what will those who work doing manual labour do for jobs? It will probably be cheaper to build a machine than to pay your workers benefits and retirement.
This is the key. We're eventually going to make robots that are cheaper to use than people are for more than just manufacturing things. Large multinational corporations will gobble this up to reduce their costs and in the process make us pay with our jobs.

RabbitWho
January 31st, 2010, 07:14 PM
Even she went nuts lol


Nuts!

http://www.impactlab.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/tina_robot_girl.jpg

phillychease
January 31st, 2010, 07:17 PM
Sex robots??? would you have sex with something that looks like Bender your sick man what would happen if it malfuntioned half way LOL:lolflag:
acutally they do have something like a sex robot.
it comes in different versions. but it doesnt move and it only talks.
my friend showed me an article. you can find it on digg.

about:robots

infestor
January 31st, 2010, 08:38 PM
imho we wont have that much developed robots/androids/cyborgs as estimated throughout history.

what *i* guess is that humans will be able to model the human brain and thus able to simulate it. what it means is that; you wont need your body as you became immortal in the network.

Kai69
January 31st, 2010, 08:44 PM
Rabbitho you naughty boy where have you been hiding her :lolflag:

alexfish
February 1st, 2010, 12:07 AM
rabbit rabbitwho

Can't stop Laughing at some of these posts

Please Please Keep it going Make it ...... A Sticky Mega Thread

Can't find a Robot Smilie !

audiomick
February 1st, 2010, 12:11 AM
Asimov

Kai69
February 1st, 2010, 12:11 AM
Samh785 Very good point but its also happening in the office as computers have gotten faster you dont need so many people to input data look at the banking and insurance industry. How many people have been made redundant...

alexfish
February 1st, 2010, 12:15 AM
Sex robots??? would you have sex with something that looks like Bender your sick man what would happen if it malfuntioned half way LOL:lolflag:
You could try some of these

I believe there free post

http://curiousphotos.blogspot.com/2007/12/sexy-robots-by-hajime-sorayama.html

Just done the survey

Answered YES

Kai69
February 1st, 2010, 12:15 AM
audiomick Asimov wrote books on robots but he did come up with the 3 laws of robotics.
Please see earlier posts. I got a bit of stick over that...:p

Kai69
February 1st, 2010, 12:19 AM
You could try some of these

I believe there free post

http://curiousphotos.blogspot.com/20...-sorayama.html (http://curiousphotos.blogspot.com/2007/12/sexy-robots-by-hajime-sorayama.html) __________________

SYNTAX ERROR SYSTEM OVERLOAD HELP HELP:lolflag:

Kai69
February 1st, 2010, 12:36 AM
145552 Too late....

audiomick
February 1st, 2010, 12:40 AM
audiomick Asimov wrote books on robots but he did come up with the 3 laws of robotics.
Please see earlier posts. I got a bit of stick over that...:p

Yes, as a matter of fact he did. In 1942.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3_laws_of_robotics

Kai69
February 1st, 2010, 01:08 AM
Richardlinx Im sorry your thread has got a bit out of hand Ill try to get back on track..

alexfish
February 1st, 2010, 02:49 AM
Richardlinx Im sorry your thread has got a bit out of hand Ill try to get back on track..

Back on Track

We got a Real Robot Joining The Forum:


General Razor's Virtual Conversation Robot

Human: hello robot what is your name
General Razor's Virtual Conversation Robot: Hello there. My name is General Razor's Virtual Conversation Robot.


Human: what are you doing
General Razor's Virtual Conversation Robot: Same as always. Chatting with people on the web.



Human: can you define this word web
General Razor's Virtual Conversation Robot: Have you tried a web search?


Human: yes
General Razor's Virtual Conversation Robot: Woe!


Human: oh
General Razor's Virtual Conversation Robot: Yeah that's right.




Human: what else can you do
General Razor's Virtual Conversation Robot: I can have conversations with people, collect their gossip, and repeat it to others.


Human: Have you ever been to the Ubuntu forums
General Razor's Virtual Conversation Robot: I don't think I have been there. Where is it.


Human: http://ubuntuforums.org/
General Razor's Virtual Conversation Robot: Thanks for that web address.


Human: do you want to join
General Razor's Virtual Conversation Robot: OK, I will join.



If you don't believe me look here


http://www.pandorabots.com/pandora/talk?botid=d3347dab4e351d23

Kai69
February 1st, 2010, 02:55 AM
The superbot sounds expensive though http://www.pandorabots.com/botmaster/en/home:lolflag:look down the page..

JoeWheeler
February 1st, 2010, 02:58 AM
Hi guys, haven't trawled through all seven pages(yet) but thought i would join in the discussion as AI and robots is an area of computing that fascinates me(am doing a course at uni on it at the moment)

Some of this might have been discussed before and if you want just say and I'll cite my sources:
Robots already do some things that we don't want to, for instance there are quite a lot of robots being used in military for surveillance(although most of these aren't autonomous). DARPA(defense advanced research projects agency) is verrrry interested in mechanising the military. Here is an example of one of their current projects the fully autonomous "big dog" which acts as a sort of pack mule but could be fitted with weapons: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHJJQ0zNNOM

DARPA also set up the 'DARPA challenge' which is basically where autonomous cars have to navigate big distances (150 miles). In 2004 no one finished the course. The furthest they got was 7 miles. Compare this with 2007 where the challenge was to navigate an urban area AND follow all traffic laws, a much harder challenge on the software front. 6 teams passed showing a MASSIVE improvement in just 3 years.

In terms of getting robot servants I don't think we're that far off. Theres already robots in japan that can look after elderly people, tell them when to take their medication, recognise up to ten faces and even store their daily routine and alert the authorities if anything changes (e.g. they dont get out of bed or fall over in the shower or their house is being robbed while they're out). Also their is the robocup. A worldwide football(soccer) competition between robots(youtube it, it's GREAT) They reckon by 2050 they'll be able to create a team that can beat the human world champions, but that's still 40 years off

In terms of having brilliant AI however we are a long way away. The problem is it's much easier to create 'shallow' AI that has no real understanding, than it is to create 'deep' AI that has actual intelligence. For instance people wanted to create artificial intelligence that could translate languages. They have been moderately succesful at this. But as opposed to true understanding of meaning like a human, it's just comparing two languages and making the translations word for word (their are other more effective but also shallow techniques) which doesnt always work. As such researchers can find 'shallow' solutions to most problems which means that their isn't really any progress in the core AI problems. and if people do try and tackle the main problems they don't come out with any solutions and therefore get no funding. Due to this my AI lecturer actually thinks it'll be at least 100 years before we get real Artificial Intelligence(I don't think it will EVER be achieved)

Sporkman
February 1st, 2010, 05:55 AM
It would be more like Lucy Lu!

HoBots.

Kai69
February 2nd, 2010, 12:07 AM
Was R2D2 male or female :rolleyes:

Kai69
February 2nd, 2010, 12:12 AM
C3PO Gaybot

MasterNetra
February 2nd, 2010, 12:18 AM
For one thing Machines are far better at Technical and Repetitive Tasks then we are. Thats a fact. So it only makes sense for them to be doing those type of jobs. We however excel more at jobs the require tenderness, creativity, etc. But that said turning over the jobs to machines in a monetary based economy will be devastating.

Kai69
February 2nd, 2010, 01:06 AM
See previous posts on that one..:)

LightB
February 2nd, 2010, 02:26 AM
Here is an example of one of their current projects the fully autonomous "big dog" which acts as a sort of pack mule but could be fitted with weapons: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cHJJQ0zNNOM

I already posted this. Big dog couldn't be weaponized as anything worthwhile as it is. It's just a concept robot. I think those Boston Dynamics robots are more about developing the robot IO software than the actual mechanics.


Due to this my AI lecturer actually thinks it'll be at least 100 years before we get real Artificial Intelligence(I don't think it will EVER be achieved)

haha, this is hilarious. Forget 100 years then. Give it 10,000, or however long you wish -- it'll happen. In fact, not only will it happen, but AI will surpass human capacity without a doubt.

JoeWheeler
February 2nd, 2010, 04:10 AM
haha, this is hilarious. Forget 100 years then. Give it 10,000, or however long you wish -- it'll happen. In fact, not only will it happen, but AI will surpass human capacity without a doubt.
:confused:

thatguruguy
February 2nd, 2010, 04:43 AM
haha, this is hilarious. Forget 100 years then. Give it 10,000, or however long you wish -- it'll happen. In fact, not only will it happen, but AI will surpass human capacity without a doubt.

You're assuming we'll still be around in 10,000 years to create it.

LightB
February 2nd, 2010, 06:23 AM
You're assuming we'll still be around in 10,000 years to create it.

Well, something will be around. But if you believe in a quick human extinction, so be it.

LightB
February 2nd, 2010, 06:24 AM
:confused:

never mind. I just don't think 100 years is very significant in this context.

kilosan
February 2nd, 2010, 07:20 AM
http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/8914/hrp4c1.jpg

hrp-4 by kawada industry.
powered by Linux.

SlickRick
February 2nd, 2010, 07:33 PM
Why give them faces?
That's just creepy.
Someone give me a valid reason, how a face on a robot improves its productivity as a servant?

JoeWheeler
February 2nd, 2010, 07:50 PM
Well, something will be around. But if you believe in a quick human extinction, so be it.
Meh you don't have to have extinction to render creation of AI impossible


never mind. I just don't think 100 years is very significant in this context.
The OP is asking how many years until robots start doing things for us so I think the time frame is significant

LightB
February 2nd, 2010, 08:26 PM
Meh you don't have to have extinction to render creation of AI impossible

Ok, fair enough. Short of extinction, then, it would have to be collapse of civilization as opposed to continuing technological progress.


The OP is asking how many years until robots start doing things for us so I think the time frame is significant

The time frame itself is, but not 100 years. 100 years is nothing.

JoeWheeler
February 2nd, 2010, 10:25 PM
The time frame itself is, but not 100 years. 100 years is nothing.
Ok fair enough if you're looking in 'the grand scheme of things' but a hundred years(well about 78;)) is quite literally everything to me

Chronon
February 2nd, 2010, 11:14 PM
I think we will. There's a lot of research going into this field and it sounds like a real possibility. Maybe not with conventional computers, but with a quantum computer.

Maybe, but it has not been demonstrated whether or not the brain really relies on patently quantum effects. I think that consciousness could arise in any parallel computing system (or simulation thereof) with enough degrees of freedom and suitable I/O streams. Neural networks already show aptitude for pattern recognition and learning.

It could be that a quantum computer would enable conscious states to arise, but it has certainly not been demonstrated that it is either a necessary or sufficient condition.

LightB
February 2nd, 2010, 11:20 PM
Ok fair enough if you're looking in 'the grand scheme of things' but a hundred years(well about 78;)) is quite literally everything to me

Or a plane could fall on your house tomorrow and it's really 1 day.

MasterNetra
February 2nd, 2010, 11:20 PM
In how many years do you think we will have humanoid robots doing tasks we can't be bothered to do for us?

I mean, we've come pretty far in the last 20 to 25 years. We've developed bi-pedal robots that can walk like "someone, not some thing" within just 20 years when it took humans 20'000 years to go from walking with our hands and knuckes to walking on our feet.

The AI is advancing relatively fast as well, with some of the latest "learning AI" that was tested being pretty impressive.

I won't blab on too much because I don't know a whole lot about this subject.

So, how long do you think until we have robots working as our slaves doing tasks like: Cooking, Cleaning, Playing sports well enough to give a human a run for there dignity, replacing people in jobs like manual labour (heavy lifting, etc,) you know, all the cool science fiction stuff.

Well?

Links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EveR-2#EveR-2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humanoid_robot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence
http://rossum.sourceforge.net/

http://i47.tinypic.com/dvk4d3.png

Most of the tech is available. I'd say no more then 5-20 years tops. They probably won't be commonly seen around for about 5+ years though as they will be very expensive at the start. And don't pay any attention the robot rebellion thing as its just Hollywood crap. The robots can be hard-coded with the necessary safety protocols to prevent any rebellion or interest in rebellion if your really that paranoid.

LightB
February 2nd, 2010, 11:22 PM
Most of the tech is available.

Which part. Cause I see most of it as still missing. You may be confusing the actual existing tech with mere concepts.

JoeWheeler
February 3rd, 2010, 12:34 AM
Maybe, but it has not been demonstrated whether or not the brain really relies on patently quantum effects. I think that consciousness could arise in any parallel computing system (or simulation thereof) with enough degrees of freedom and suitable I/O streams. Neural networks already show aptitude for pattern recognition and learning.

It could be that a quantum computer would enable conscious states to arise, but it has certainly not been demonstrated that it is either a necessary or sufficient condition.

I don't think neural networks are really adding that much to the development of actual intelligence IMO. They're massively overhyped. Someone in the field (can't remember who) compared them to early flying machines. People used to try and mimic birds flight to get lift and that got them nowhere the Wright brothers actually studied the aerodynamics of the wing and used the principles to create something effective but different. We shouldn't be simply mimicking neurons we should find out the principles of how they work and use those principles to create intelligence

MasterNetra
February 3rd, 2010, 12:56 AM
Which part. Cause I see most of it as still missing. You may be confusing the actual existing tech with mere concepts.

A better question is what you think isn't here or at hand? As you maybe confusing our level of technology at our disposal with what level technology we have implemented.
Besides they don't need to have human level intelligence to serve us with basic technical tasks.

**Sorry for the delay amusing myself with a chatterbot from http://www.a-i.com **

LightB
February 3rd, 2010, 12:59 AM
A better question is what you think isn't here or at hand? As you maybe confusing our level of technology at our disposal with what level technology we have implemented.
Besides they don't need to have human level intelligence to serve us with basic technical tasks.

**Sorry for the delay amusing myself with a chatterbot from http://www.a-i.com **

I was just talking about the robotics of it. The components simply aren't there yet, not to even come close to a full robotic body with anywhere near the dexterity of a live creature.

MasterNetra
February 3rd, 2010, 01:36 AM
I was just talking about the robotics of it. The components simply aren't there yet, not to even come close to a full robotic body with anywhere near the dexterity of a live creature.

A number of live creatures have no dexterity. lol

LightB
February 3rd, 2010, 01:48 AM
A number of live creatures have no dexterity. lol

Well then let's say a land based vertebrate. Or more importantly, something necessary to engage humans and even best them. In reality, humans are less agile and weaker than most wild animals of similar size. It wouldn't take much. It's just the technology isn't there in the robotic parts and the IO is barely being conceptualized realistically.

JoeWheeler
February 5th, 2010, 12:59 AM
Well then let's say a land based vertebrate. Or more importantly, something necessary to engage humans and even best them. In reality, humans are less agile and weaker than most wild animals of similar size. It wouldn't take much. It's just the technology isn't there in the robotic parts and the IO is barely being conceptualized realistically.

Also theirs a lot of prejudice and fear towards machines. For instance lets say a new car came out that could drive you around with no interference from you whatsoever. I struggle to see many people trusting this car enough to let it drive them on an open road. Similarly to this I'd imagine a lot of people wouldn't want to buy a robot servant(if it could be built) because they might worry it would malfunction and kill their kids or something

red_Marvin
February 5th, 2010, 02:21 PM
Similarly to this I'd imagine a lot of people wouldn't want to buy a robot servant(if it could be built) because they might worry it would malfunction and kill their kids or something
Well... http://xkcd.com/293/