Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Robotics and Automation

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    I like to think the systems can tell the difference between a tumbleweed, a dog and a person crossing the road but maybe not every time? How would these cars react to tumbleweed stampedes?



    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by RobertKLR View Post
      I like to think the systems can tell the difference between a tumbleweed, a dog and a person crossing the road but maybe not every time? How would these cars react to tumbleweed stampedes?


      That would depend entirely on how the data from sensors would be interpreted, and what kind of sensors there are. If it’s FLIR, it’s not going to mistake it for a person. I’d have to go dig up some studies on automotive sensors and DSP chips in cars to give you a real answer.

      Comment


      • #63
        For the blind and physically disabled autonomous vehicles seem like an excellent idea ... to gain that level of freedom. Meanwhile robots like the ones in this video get spookier each day.

        Comment


        • #64
          I've just watched a lecture about big data, artificial intelligence and "industry 4.0" or "internet of things" as it's called in the US and i suddenly came to the realisation that we are probably doing it all wrong. I mean that sounds like i have the answer to a question that is not really there but everything we do in robotics and artificial intelligence is mimicking of human behaviour, because it's what we know, it can deliver results (compare the work of a robot to a human) and it integrates itself into existing concepts and workflows.
          But wouldn't the real revolution be there when AI were able to develop their own ways of thinking and doing things? I mean, we pack stuff in boxes, because they are handy for us. But that doesn't mean that "putting things in a box" is the grade A solution for everything. Maybe you could just pile stuff up and a logistics-robot will find it anyways. Are we able to progress if we want to keep control over AI all the time?
          I know that i don't pose a question here or anything but this just came to my mind and struck me and i wanted to write it down. And i'm not high or anything.

          Comment


          • #65
            We do it because evolution lead to it. Evolution is a master of developing superb solutions. For organisms. Albeit some physical feats transliterate to robotics aswell like movements of limbs.



            It is just engineering ad even there natural solutions are used because nature developed perfect solutions through try and error.

            Why re-invent the wheel?


            Robotic evolution would be needed. But how should that work?

            The robotic evolution process could for example be some kind of infinite simulation and taking the best result in the end.


            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by Hansinator View Post
              I've just watched a lecture about big data, artificial intelligence and "industry 4.0" or "internet of things" as it's called in the US and i suddenly came to the realisation that we are probably doing it all wrong. I mean that sounds like i have the answer to a question that is not really there but everything we do in robotics and artificial intelligence is mimicking of human behaviour, because it's what we know, it can deliver results (compare the work of a robot to a human) and it integrates itself into existing concepts and workflows.
              But wouldn't the real revolution be there when AI were able to develop their own ways of thinking and doing things? I mean, we pack stuff in boxes, because they are handy for us. But that doesn't mean that "putting things in a box" is the grade A solution for everything. Maybe you could just pile stuff up and a logistics-robot will find it anyways. Are we able to progress if we want to keep control over AI all the time?
              I know that i don't pose a question here or anything but this just came to my mind and struck me and i wanted to write it down. And i'm not high or anything.
              a) first of all, more robotics and automation in future means lesser tax income plus a redundant overpopulation..

              b) ..and if you ignore reglementations just to create a manmade evolution that acts independently or with unique ways to solve issues then be prepared to get a couple of oscars. a progress in areas you dont have access to / or advances out of your boundaries.. in an uncontrolled way is against the laws of ethics and reglementations,.. evolution of ai, robotics and automation should always be in sync with evolution of mankind, top priority.
              Last edited by heiliger_geist; 21-02-2018, 11:54 AM.

              Comment


              • #67
                at least you know its not going to spit on it - well you hope it doesn't
                Flippy, a burger-turning robot, has begun work at a restaurant in Pasadena, Los Angeles.

                Comment


                • #68
                  The $12K/yr operating costs doesn't sound right. That's probably the cost of a service contract for multiple machines.

                  A friend of mine works in Ft Worth at a Tyson corn dog plant as a tech. The automation is amazing and was just recently upgraded with newest robotics. It won't be long before the only people working there are robots and technicians.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    looks like it needs 5 pints of larger,,,,,,,,,,,
                    The automated cook is switched off while upgrades are prepared to help it work faster.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X