All of the videos of humanoid/walking robots remind me of a mechanics/metalworking teacher I had who explained how the human body is an incredibly bad design for industrial use. His demonstration of a human-shaped crane, bending at the hips and legs to pick up heavy objects, was memorable.

I can see some household/servant-type applications for these but their usefulness seems to end there. Locomotion by tracks and/or wheels would be superior in almost every situation.

>> ^dag:

wow. wow. Really impressive. A very different approach than the massive industrial ASIMO - but, maybe coming from the toy angle and scaling up is a better way to go. I hope he open sources the software and lets people tinker.


I WANT!!!!

Thanks, dag!

In reply to this comment by dag:
*promote

It's like Scientology, V and Men in Black all mashed together in 'Made for TV' movie style awesomeness!!


Pleiadeans:
"Aryan Nordic Aliens from the Pleiades star cluster"

Reptilians:
"Blood-drinking, shape-shifting reptilian humanoids from the Alpha Draconis star system, now hiding in underground bases in Hollow Earth, are the force behind a worldwide conspiracy directed at humanity."

More here
(This chick is bat shit crazy, I tuned out around "Mother earth shocked me to give me psychic powers")

This is one step closer to satisfying the 1.2 million dangerously asexual adolescent Japanese population. I see no point in building a humanoid femmebot other than 1) Science, 2) Sex.

Its really all about the winged humanoids living in the sky and red skinned cloven hoofed bad guys living under the ground.

It's an impressive feat, but not as impressive as it seems. The robot wasn't made to respond to any novel dynamic circumstances. It just preformed preprogrammed poses, on a smooth, flat surface. I guess it did a little object tracking too. The real challenge in robotics is dealing with the dynamics, which is why the "big dog" videos by Boston Dynamics are so impressive. Everyone laughs at how it slips on ice, or has trouble getting its footing, but if you put this thing in the same circumstances, it would be a pile of broken circuit boards in no time. Granted, the big dog is quadrupedal, while this is bipedal, which is a much harder problem. Still, it doesn't seem as though they even make an effort to give it dynamic stability. I'm not sure they'll ever get to a decent humanoid robot until they start incorporating more muscle inspired actuators. The servos on these things just don't have the sort of mechanical compliance that allows our sloppy movements to be so forgiving.

I'm not the one making the claim a magical invisible sky god with a zombie for a son is real without a shred of evidence supporting said claim. I'm not the one claiming that a global flood caused by a vengeful universal overseer destroyed everything on the planet, but was saved by a 700 year old man. Somehow said old man managed to gather and save millions of species (in pairs mind you) to prevent them from going extinct. I'm not the one making the claim that the Earth is 6000 years old, and that all mankind descended from two humans... one of which was created from a rib-bone. Never mind the fact that their children would have had to participate in incest for at least a number of generations before there were enough individuals where one could 'convince' one's self that they were no longer participating in incestuous relations. I am not the one claiming that winged humanoids live in the sky, and that red horned cloven hoofed demonoids live below the ground. I am not the one claiming that if you don't bow down and be subservient to said jealous sky-god, that you will end up frying in a so-called 'lake of fire' in the underworld and suffer eternally.. somehow... long after your corporeal remains have long become worm shit.

I am not the one claiming any such nonsense. I am simply indicating that it is what it is. Nonsense. Mother goose stories have more consistency to them that the bunk spewed by the bible and the child molesting men that preach it.

It is not my duty to prove anything. It is yours.. as a so-called believer to prove it to us. To explain the inconsistencies and the hypocrisy in the bible. If the bible is 'God's true word', then it should be taken literally in it's entirety. By simply calling things metaphor, or discarding entire sections of the said 'holy book' out of convenience, or because you don't like it... doesn't help prove a religious persons point. Take it as it is. Literally. Then start enslaving people from neighboring states, and protest against the state to bring back stoning as a valid punishment for heretical behavior... like me.

Blasphemy: Is a victimless crime.

>> ^r10k:

Before trying to figure that side of things out, work on your basic theology some more (ie: learn about the bible properly). When you have it so completely out of whack, it makes your thoughts on that topic sound utterly confusing.
Ah wait, I just read the bit where you don't believe in any of it anyway. In that case, welcome to the "I have no idea about anything but I'll just dribble on with a bunch of pointless thoughts anyway" club.
>> ^honkeytonk73:
So.. if Jesus was the product of God impregnating a virgin to give birth to himself so that he could kill himself to make a point having something to do with sin.. that really didn't need to be done in the first place. When one hangs an image of tortured Jesus in a Church. Then one would certainly be depicting a graven image. Commandment #2 is now being broken in most every Christian church across the globe and around the necks of many Christians as well.

>> ^MarineGunrock:

Thing reminds me of a Scrag!


+1 for you sir. Good catch.

"a minimalist humanoid robot that recreates the physical presence of a remote user"... if that remote user is a worm-like creature with a hairless human head.

>> ^bamdrew:

this is precisely why the Lord gave us robotics


yea and this shows exactly how much the Chinese value the fleshy succulent bones of humanoid meatbags.

It depends on what the scientific literature says. And I believe the science is in agreement with what the doctor is doing, at least as it's presented in this video.

As when trying to determine when anything is good or bad, the relevant question is "Does this promote or hurt the long term prosperity of society?". The science says this is good for the individuals who need it, so the question is then "Does this negatively impact other people?". It could if, for example, the procedure were applied to people who the science says either do not need it or it will not work on. So there needs to be some system of checks to ensure the procedure is not abused. In the video, they said it requires a doctor's permission, the parent's permission, and court approval; that is more than enough oversight.

At first glance we may find this kind of treatment shocking. But I hypothesize that reaction is similar to our reaction when seeing humanoid robots in the uncanny valley. There is some combination of factors that we are not use to, directly or evolutionarily, seeing together--perhaps a person inflicting pain on another in a clinical unemotional way--so it produces in us a sensation that something is wrong. However, that indirect nature is actually a benefit if you compare the procedure with more commonplace methods of punishing children with pain. Whenever a person hits a child with a hand or belt or anything else, no matter how justified, he is directly teaching that child that violence and force are acceptable means of getting one's way. If the patients of the shock treatment do not perceive it as an aggressive action from another person, then all else being equal, that alone would make it superior to corporal punishment. And few(not enough) people get up in arms over corporal punishment.

>> ^mxxcon:

>> ^ant:

Where's Siftbot?
holding the camera


Yep, that's me! Am I cool or what?

>> ^ant:

Where's Siftbot?
holding the camera

>> ^shuac:

Does this really go on for over 8 minutes? Oy.
no, later on they start fighting and one accidentally decapitates a by-standing cat