DailyDirt: Cool Robot Videos

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Watching robots in action is far more entertaining than just reading about what robots can do. That's mostly because there's always a slight chance that the robot will "go crazy" and do something totally unexpected (and usually destructive). We haven't included any destructive robot videos here, but the following links are all pretty interesting robot projects:

Don't taunt robots that handle knives and de-bone hams for a living. The HAMDAS-R ham de-boning robot makes an excellent gift for the holidays -- if you happen to be friends with an industrial ham processing plant owner. [url]

Smarter cars could play follow-the-leader on highways. Relying on a robot driver, even if it's following a human driver, seems a bit too risky still. [url]

A bipedal robot, that runs like people do, uses "pneumatic muscles" which mimic human legs. This robot looks like it still needs to learn how to walk first. [url]

The world's first badminton robot doesn't seem to want to show off its moves too much. Its shyness is probably due to the fact that it's literally a one-dimensional player -- it can only move back and forth along a line. [url]

Playing air hockey against a robot arm looks like more fun. But after a while, it probably isn't much fun to play against a "perfect" air hockey defense. [url]

Filed Under: air hockey, autonomous vehicle, badminton, robots

DailyDirt: Unmanned Spaceships And Robots

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Artificial intelligence software still seems like science fiction -- even though smarter and smarter software is found in all sorts of everyday gadgets now. Robots are replacing humans in manufacturing jobs and doing all sorts of dirty work that people can't or won't do. So let's hear it for our automated slaves doing cool stuff for us.

The US Air Force's unmanned X-37B space plane lands after 7 months in orbit. Who really needs the space shuttle anymore? (And note that the Russians pretty much accomplished this feat with the Buran, too.) url

The Uncanny Valley still runs pretty deep, so creepy-looking robots will be the norm for the near future. url

There's nothing creepy about Japanese robots picking ripe strawberries: Yum. url

NerdKits has built a xylophone glockenspiel robot for the holidays -- and has released open source code along with DIY instructions for it. url

Filed Under: robots, spaceships

Do Robots Need A Section 230-Style Safe Harbor?

from the future-questions dept

Forget Asimov's three laws of robotics. These days, there are questions about what human laws robots may need to follow. Michael Scott points us to an interesting, if highly speculative, article questioning legal issues related to robots, questioning whether or not a new arena of law will need to be developed to handle liability when it comes to actions done by robots. There are certain questions concerning who would be liable? Those who built the robot? Those who programed it? Those who operated it? Others? The robot itself? While the article seems to go a little overboard at times (claiming that there's a problem if teens program a robot to do something bad since teens are "judgment proof" due to a lack of money -- which hardly stops liability on teens in other suits) it does make some important points.

Key among those is the point that if liability is too high for the companies doing the innovating in the US, it could lead to the industry developing elsewhere. As a parallel, the article brings up the Section 230 safe harbors of the CDA, which famously protect service providers from liability for actions by users -- noting that this is part of why so many more internet businesses have been built in the US than elsewhere (there are other issues too, but such liability protections certainly help). So, what would a "section 230"-like liability safe harbor look like for robots?

Filed Under: liability, robots, safe harbors, section 230

How Noncompete Agreements Will Make Our Troops Less Safe

from the bad-news-for-everyone dept

Earlier this month, we wrote about the dangers of noncompete agreements and how they tend to slow innovation and hurt regions compared to those, such as California, that do not enforce noncompetes. Most of the research on noncompetes tends to compare Massachusetts, which enforces noncompetes, to California. And, in an unfortunate demonstration of the dangers of noncompetes, iRobot, a Massachusetts company has just forced a competitor completely out of business, and our troops may be less safe because of it. Many people know iRobot for the cute little Roomba vacuum cleaner robot, but the company's main line of business has always been selling robots to the military to help them locate and dispose of explosives. A new company sprang up recently, called Robotic FX, founded by a former iRobot employee. Robotic FX had just scored an army contract to make some similar robots. The competition would have been good for everyone. It would have pushed both companies to continue to innovate and make better, more efficient and more cost effective robots. Instead, iRobot sued and has forced Robotic FX completely out of business and banned its founder from working in the industry for five years. Here's a knowledgeable expert on robotics who can help make useful robots that will help keep our troops safer... and he's not allowed to work in the industry for five years. That doesn't seem like a good outcome for anyone... other than iRobot who can rest on its laurels rather than having to innovate in the face of competition. Update: Wanted to update this following some comments that suggest my summary was inaccurate. I apologize if it was not clear, so let me clarify here. The guy was accused of patent infringement and trade secret violations in what he was doing. That was the central part of the case. The "noncompete" wasn't specifically an agreement he signed, but it's a result of the lawsuit. I should have been clearer about the accusations of infringement, but I don't believe this changes the point of the post at all. It's still a case where a noncompete (created by the court, rather than as part of an employment agreement) is used to stifle competition. That there may have been patent infringement is somewhat meaningless to me, as should be clear from my other discussions on patents. Competition is competition -- and it would have driven better results, even if based on the same patents.

Filed Under: noncompetes, robots
Companies: irobot, robotic fx

Google Funding X Prize For Moon Landing

from the fly-me-to-the-moon dept

We've been impressed with the concept of the "X Prize" and other similar innovation-by-competition programs for many, many years. With the success of SpaceShipOne in claiming the very first X Prize (launching a man into space in a privately built rocket), the concept of prize-driven innovation has only taken off, with plenty of interest coming from private industry, looking to foster innovation in specific areas. Apparently, Google has decided to join the party -- though not in its core field of interest. It's no secret that Google's co-founders are quite interested in space and space exploration, so it shouldn't come as a huge surprise that Google is putting up the money for a new X Prize for sending a robot to the moon. The robot is required to do certain things once it reaches the moon in order to claim the prize. Google is doing this through the same group that ran the original X Prize, rather than doing it entirely separately, but it's no surprise that having Google's name attached to the prize will help generate even more interest in the program. Still, it'll be interesting if we start seeing a lot more private interest in creating and funding these types of prizes. It's likely that many of them, like Netflix's, will be quite specific to what the company is working on -- but the possibilities for companies with some extra money to burn to fund some pretty far out research could lead to some really fascinating contests.

Filed Under: moon, private space travel, robots, space, x prize
Companies: google