One word comes to mind when I think of free roaming robots - Jawas.
As a kid, a slightly distressing part of Star Wars was R2D2 getting
zapped by a band of cute but spooky-eyed scavengers who kidnap and
sell robots for spare parts!
Robots may survive in well lit, surveilled streets of Earth's cities,
but they won't need to wander as far as outer-rim desert world of
Tatooine to get into trouble.
A situation much like the early days of network hacking, but in the
real physical world is latent. Despite benevolent anthropomorphism,
robots aren't much loved by humans. They're packed with valuable
electronics. But much more fun... they can be captured, hacked to
perform the bidding of a new master and released back into
circulation. Iran capturing the RQ-170 stealth drone in 2011 was
almost inevitable but portends a new frontier in digital defence in
physical space. Ultimately this leads to robots that can "defend
themselves", and so to the obvious escalation of force between humans
and machines.
For this reason I predict that, like domesticated dogs, robots have
limited room to rove, close to protective masters.
> Despite benevolent anthropomorphism, robots aren't much loved by humans.
That brings to mind the hitchBOT [1] experiment from 2013 to 2015. It did well - helped by media attention - in parts of Europe and Canada, but later came to grief in Philadelphia [2].
Brazil has some experience with people being nasty to machines.
1. Robotic bank tellers (atm): we had a huge crime wave where people would literally blow them up to steal contents. It got so violent that some places refused to have one nearby, some explosions demolished buildings, and gun battles sometimes happened, one of them even involved people using anti-material sniper rifles and left the surroundings completely demolished and several corpses destroyed in gory ways (like people cut in half by bullets)
2. Only places where you can play arcade games are very secure (like airports), I asked a manufacturer about it, and he said any arcade game in a bar for example invariably get destroyed as people steal its components (chips, cables, etc... people steal the valuable silicon parts for sale, and the metallic ones like cables and connectors to melt down)
>For this reason I predict that, like domesticated dogs, robots have limited room to rove, close to protective masters.
Maybe, but robots will have something that domesticated dogs, and their wild counterparts, don't have - the ability to communicate and effectively (perfectly?) share information. Just like a driver would ask a gas station attendant for directions, a lost robot could ask a local one for information on its surroundings and use that to plot a course. My Roomba may not need to leave my house, but it could tell a passing delivery bot when it has arrived at what I consider my front door.
I'm not sure you can compare military drones flying in hostile airspace* to robo dogs in your neighbourhood.
After all real dogs and cats usually aren't in danger of kidnapping even though you could sell them or eat them or something. Indeed if they're anything like real animals, the biggest danger will be inattentive drivers.
* Have you considered not flying your military drones over other countries?
I used to own an early-generation Roomba. I believe, the entirety of its sensors were:
- microswitches that trigger if it ran into something
- a set of photodiodes for detecting "cliffs", i.e. keep it from falling down the stairs
- another photodiode for sensing the dock's IR beacon
- something that looked like a step counter (but it kept getting gunked up, yet never impacted the robot's behaviour - which makes me believe it wasn't actually used for anything)
No cameras, LIDARs or internet connection, and I'm pretty sure no local mapmaking either.
Movement was essentially random, with a small set of heuristics and preprogrammed patterns. When you were actually watching the robot, the random movement was kind of ennerving - it would frequently clean the same spot over and over again, while completely missing another spot right next to it.
However, when setting the robot on a daily cleaning schedule, the random movements would even out and the room would be cleaned pretty well in the end.
I had one of those, and I think the cliff detector was even more basic - a sensor that brushed against the floor and tripped when it no longer was pressed. I remember being disappointed when I learned that it's approach to sweeping was "do it for a long time and eventually you'll get everything." Maybe, but I had higher expectations. Mine also regularly blew through the IR "walls" and got stuck under a dresser, waiting for me to return home with it's familiar "help" beeps.
Giving the amount of the territory already polluted with unexploded ordinance in Ukraine i imagine in near future Roomba tanks wondering around "cleaning" the fields/etc.
I know it's cynical but having lived in rough areas I get a chuckle out of sheltered engineers designing these and not expecting teenagers to absolutely destroy them in the wild. The poor Estonians can't grok what it's like in East Palo Alto.
I wonder why don't they just program them to ask and follow directions from people. It has served humanity well for almost all of its existence.
Of course, it goes against the current trend in technology, which is all about giving individuals complete independence from other individuals, so they can ignore them as much as they want... but hell, wouldn't it make a robot look _way_ more trustworthy and friendly, if you see first that they trust _you_, by asking for your help?
Natural language processing just isn't far enough along to understand human direction giving.
source: For my masters degree I wrote a paper on the grounding problem (linking words said to physical objects), specifically the spatial reasoning component ("please give me the book on the table in the corner). We were able to get very simple commands to work, but anything remotely complicated, especially with a temporal aspect or things that can't immediately be seen (keep going until you see the red building, then turn left) is the realm of future research
"You only have to go this way over there, over there where the shop of the old... what was his name?... you know, i can guarantee you he makes the best chillie... ah, where was i? Yeah, now, go this way..." (etc, etc)
This is a fairly accurate description of a "guide" i got from a nice guy after asking him where my hotel may be... and now imagine the software that must be involved to decode THIS...
I'm imagining this feels like the first time you let your kid walk to a friends house - so curious, young, naïve, just wandering as you watch anxiously from the sidelines.
[+] [-] nonrandomstring|3 years ago|reply
As a kid, a slightly distressing part of Star Wars was R2D2 getting zapped by a band of cute but spooky-eyed scavengers who kidnap and sell robots for spare parts!
Robots may survive in well lit, surveilled streets of Earth's cities, but they won't need to wander as far as outer-rim desert world of Tatooine to get into trouble.
A situation much like the early days of network hacking, but in the real physical world is latent. Despite benevolent anthropomorphism, robots aren't much loved by humans. They're packed with valuable electronics. But much more fun... they can be captured, hacked to perform the bidding of a new master and released back into circulation. Iran capturing the RQ-170 stealth drone in 2011 was almost inevitable but portends a new frontier in digital defence in physical space. Ultimately this leads to robots that can "defend themselves", and so to the obvious escalation of force between humans and machines.
For this reason I predict that, like domesticated dogs, robots have limited room to rove, close to protective masters.
[+] [-] samizdis|3 years ago|reply
That brings to mind the hitchBOT [1] experiment from 2013 to 2015. It did well - helped by media attention - in parts of Europe and Canada, but later came to grief in Philadelphia [2].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HitchBOT
[2] HN comment thread on HitchBOT destroyed in Philadelphia, ending U.S. tour
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9990881
[+] [-] speeder|3 years ago|reply
Brazil has some experience with people being nasty to machines.
1. Robotic bank tellers (atm): we had a huge crime wave where people would literally blow them up to steal contents. It got so violent that some places refused to have one nearby, some explosions demolished buildings, and gun battles sometimes happened, one of them even involved people using anti-material sniper rifles and left the surroundings completely demolished and several corpses destroyed in gory ways (like people cut in half by bullets)
2. Only places where you can play arcade games are very secure (like airports), I asked a manufacturer about it, and he said any arcade game in a bar for example invariably get destroyed as people steal its components (chips, cables, etc... people steal the valuable silicon parts for sale, and the metallic ones like cables and connectors to melt down)
[+] [-] eddieroger|3 years ago|reply
Maybe, but robots will have something that domesticated dogs, and their wild counterparts, don't have - the ability to communicate and effectively (perfectly?) share information. Just like a driver would ask a gas station attendant for directions, a lost robot could ask a local one for information on its surroundings and use that to plot a course. My Roomba may not need to leave my house, but it could tell a passing delivery bot when it has arrived at what I consider my front door.
[+] [-] goodpoint|3 years ago|reply
Why people fuel this fantasy of roaming robots being stolen?
Of all valuable things that can be stolen, old cars are the easiest choice for a thief and robots are the worst.
An AI device filled to the brim with sensors, cameras, GPS and with remote connectivity is the perfect go-to-prison card.
> Ultimately this leads to robots that can "defend themselves", and so to the obvious escalation of force between humans and machines.
Is this scifi worldbuilding or reality? No, your new car is not going to incinerate thieves like in Robocop 2.
[+] [-] okasaki|3 years ago|reply
After all real dogs and cats usually aren't in danger of kidnapping even though you could sell them or eat them or something. Indeed if they're anything like real animals, the biggest danger will be inattentive drivers.
* Have you considered not flying your military drones over other countries?
[+] [-] xg15|3 years ago|reply
- microswitches that trigger if it ran into something
- a set of photodiodes for detecting "cliffs", i.e. keep it from falling down the stairs
- another photodiode for sensing the dock's IR beacon
- something that looked like a step counter (but it kept getting gunked up, yet never impacted the robot's behaviour - which makes me believe it wasn't actually used for anything)
No cameras, LIDARs or internet connection, and I'm pretty sure no local mapmaking either.
Movement was essentially random, with a small set of heuristics and preprogrammed patterns. When you were actually watching the robot, the random movement was kind of ennerving - it would frequently clean the same spot over and over again, while completely missing another spot right next to it.
However, when setting the robot on a daily cleaning schedule, the random movements would even out and the room would be cleaned pretty well in the end.
[+] [-] eddieroger|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] trhway|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] robk|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rexreed|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] seu|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] RugnirViking|3 years ago|reply
source: For my masters degree I wrote a paper on the grounding problem (linking words said to physical objects), specifically the spatial reasoning component ("please give me the book on the table in the corner). We were able to get very simple commands to work, but anything remotely complicated, especially with a temporal aspect or things that can't immediately be seen (keep going until you see the red building, then turn left) is the realm of future research
[+] [-] RalfWausE|3 years ago|reply
This is a fairly accurate description of a "guide" i got from a nice guy after asking him where my hotel may be... and now imagine the software that must be involved to decode THIS...
[+] [-] trailingComma|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ComputerCat|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jmclnx|3 years ago|reply