Ha-ha.

Or perhaps that's just what they want us to think....

Bringing up Baby (robot)

Consider this an addendum to my previous post concerning the use of robot babies in Mexico.

Researchers in six European countries have undertaken a 2.3 million Euro project (that's $3,031,149.46 for today's exchange rate) whose goal is to build robots that "learn from humans and respond in a socially and emotionally appropriate manner".

From the article: "The project involves building a series of robots that can take sensory input from the humans they are interacting with and then adapt their behaviour accordingly."

This involves feeding the robots sensory input, teaching them the ability to detect facial expressions, and even programming them so that they will imprint on the first object (human) they see.

So far the researchers have been using only "simple" robots, in some cases, off-the-shelf products. (You go! Maximize those European research, er, Euros!) However, something tells me it won't be long before they start playing with bigger, more potentially lethal machines. (Don't they ever learn???)

But back to the the robot babies. It's not a huge jump to the point where we'll start seeing this adaptive knowledge programmed into the little tykes they're doling out to the teenagers in Chihuahua, et. al. Then who's to say that robot changelings aren't next? (If it worked for fairies and ghouls, why not 'bots?) Project this out to its logical conclusion: not only will the robots be scaring the kids out of having sex, but they'll be replacing little bundles of joy right in the cradle.

With a little luck, maybe there's still time to build in the appropriate switches.

Sex Ed 2.0

The Best Intentions Update:

From News.com.au comes this new insidious threat to humanity. Educators in the Mexican state of Chihuahua have begun an effort to use robot babies to reduce teen pregnancies.

From the article:

"Pairs of teenage boys and girls aged 13 to 17 have to spend two or three days tending to the computerised babies, programmed to cry for food, burp and wake up screaming at night until they are rocked back to sleep."

and

"Students in Chihuahua are mostly horrified at the amount of work involved in looking after a baby, which they take home at night, Mr (Pilar) Huidobro said."

You heard it right: they're horrified. Three cheers for negative reinforcement!

Now, some might look at this as a good thing. Obviously, a program such as this can be beneficial in that it teaches teenagers to be more sexually responsible.

However, other more cynical minds, like those of us at Robot Doom, choose to look at this another way:

This is nothing short of a robotic attempt at human eugenics.

Threat Rating: 6

Why waste time and resources actively exterminating humanity when you can just campaign for safe sex? Seriously, what better way for the 'bots to ensure our demise than to just convince future generations of humans not to procreate?

We're onto you robots, oh, we're onto you...

RedOwl?

What kind of name is that?

The fine folks at iRobot (makers of Roomba) apparently figured out the real money's in defense contracting. So as reported a little while back, they've figured out a way to find snipers using a system attached to the Packbot.

Apparently, they've upgraded the capabilities since the original announcement as it seems a bit "bulked up" since the designs in the earlier articles. But, hey, it's helping our men and women in uniform, so no complaints from me this time.

(I mean, it's not like they could attach a firearm to it, right?)

Oh, sure, fine...

...make them all cute and cuddly. (Also make note of Mr. Spoon! and the vacuuming robot that can use elevators...) At least they have a sense of humor.

Robots 1, Rednecks 0

The Best Intentions Update

At first reading, I thought this would make a humorous robot interest piece, but on further reflection, I think this definitely raises the threat level just a bit (see below).

The Pennsylvania Game Commision is now using robot decoys to tempt and ensnare hunters who illegally shoot at animals from within 25 yards of a roadway.

In this instance, a robot pheasant was used to entice the would-be hunters, however robot deer and turkeys are used at other times of the year. No mention in the article of exactly how they were able to identify the hunters who are caught. (Cameras on the road? Officers in hiding? The Honor System?) The penalty is $150 for shooting too close to the road.

I don't know if I'm more disturbed that the robots are now involved in the Field & Stream version of Abscam (Robo-scam?), or that there are enough hunters out there who routinely carry loaded firearms in their vehicles, and who will jump out and shoot at an animal on the side of the road at a moment's notice, for this to be considered a problem worthy of a law enforcement "sting".

Wait a minute. I grew up in West Milford, NJ. Forget I even asked that.

Danger Rating: 3

I see this as just one more reason for the robots to be pissed at us once they do become self-aware. Nobody likes being used as target practice.

We're Here, We're Que--, Um, Robots, Get Used to Us

As readers of science fiction had predicted long ago, members of the British government have finally caught on to the imminent robot threat and have even written a speculative paper "warning that robots may one day demand their emancipation from humans."

Here's how it works: Humans create smart robots to do human work. Robots eventually become smarter and smarter until they actually achieve a level of self-awareness. Robots strike and demand equal benefits for them and their spouses. (Okay, so that last part was a bit of a stretch, but you see where this is going. It's all about the sanctity of marriage, people! What if your children see the robots engaging in their, er, robot ways? They may catch the gay, I mean, robot. Pretty soon it'll be armageddon!)

I suppose we should be comforted that this originated from a somewhat noteworthy authority. Perhaps it's a pre-emptive strike against the Cybermen, Daleks, and Autons who will no doubt overrun England in the future. At least if we can believe what we see on Dr. Who.

Robots Invade the Social Network

By way of Fark.com comes this article from the Japanese newspaper The Daily Yomiuri Online. An association has been created to promote robot businesses.

At first, I wasn't sure if this meant businesses using robots or businesses run by robots. Boy, that was a nervous couple of seconds, let me tell you. Have no fear. At least for now, there are no 'bots in the Rotary Club...so far as we know.

Five working groups are expected to be formed to help stimulate the robot industry. These will deal with things such as using robots more in wellfare services to insurance for accidents caused by robots. My question is: Will the insurance cover me when the robots break into my house to steal my medication?

At least Sam Waterston's career is safe.

Maybe Not Great, But Definitely Pretty Good

It's been a pretty dry spell for news on all things robotic, which may or may not be a good thing. The best I have to offer is this piece I culled from a link on Fark.com.

The folks over at Forbes.com must have had some spare time on their hands recently, so they decided to make a list of 25 Great Achievements in Robotics History.

Spanning over 3400 years, it's an interesting overview, including actual inventions, as well as the more philosophical musings on robot-dom from the likes of Aristotle, Da Vinci, and Asimov (however I take issue with the inclusion of 5, count 'em, 5 fictional robotic characters).

My personal favorite is the clockwork duck built in 1737 by Jacques de Vaucanson that could flap its wings, quack, and eat and digest food.

Missing from the list, any mention of Alan Turing, a visionary who not only designed some of the first computers, but who in 1950 articulated the Turing Test for machine intelligence, something the bloggers of Robot Doom are very keen to monitor...

Well, we knew this was coming...

...didn't we? As reported on Wired's Table of Malcontents, as brought to our attention by alert reader Oragamislayer.

(I'm sure there's a "squeal like a pig" joke in here, but I'm too tired to think of it).

Danger Level: 9 (now they know...)

Ah Jeez, Not This $#!+ Again...

It's been a good two months since the last post to the blog, and if I hadn't seen or spoken to all the contributors recently, I'd wonder if the 'bots finally got to them. I know I've seen some articles in that time that weren't all that great (but I may still post the one about robots curing baldness...), but this one I just couldn't resist.

It seems our DARPA overlords are once again rearing their ugly heads, and this time, in the words of Evil Robot Ted "Theodore" Logan, they've got a full-on robot chubby. Tiny robots. Flying swarms of tiny robots. Flying swarms of tiny robots that can act completely on their own...and kill you. Interested? Why not join in the fun and submit your own design?

I think the question below the headline says it all.

Danger Level: 10

I don't know why we even bother with this blog anymore.

Stupid Robot Tricks

File this under "Robots are only as good as their software," or better yet, "Hey dumbass, make sure you've got your license in order."

This particular gem comes from the lovely Garden State. Recently, a robot parking lot in Hoboken shut down, trapping several cars inside for days. Apparently,the city failed to come to an agreement regarding payment for licensing, etc., with the software company who both created and maintained the software and equipment. The software company pulled up stakes, and when the date on the software license ran out, allowed the garage to shut itself down.

Priceless.

Both parties have since come to an agreement and the trapped automobiles are now free to roam the asphalt veldts of the Turnpike and Parkway so long as their EZ-Passes are well stocked.

Aibo Experimentation

I have so much back-logged stuff to report, but this bit about robot dog experimentation just came across my desk from the fine folks at Engadget (by way of my officemate), and I'm pretty sure I couldn't have said it any better...

Nice to know we're not the only ones watching this...

Danger Rating: 8

Hey Joe, Waddya Know?

For those without encyclopedic recall of movie quotes, that was a question posed to Jude Law's character, Gigilo Joe, in the Kubrick/Spielberg movie A.I. While craptacular on many levels, the film did have the prescience to forsee a topic broached at a recent conference of Euron (the European Robotics Research Network): what happens if robots turn out to be sexy?

(I don't know about the guys at this conference, but I've seen enough anime to know the answer to that question, and so does Masamune Shirow: they can kick your ass and give you a funny feeling in your pants at the same time.)

It's not like sci-fi movies have never given us "what if?" scenarios before this. Fritz Lang served up quite a robotic dish in Metropolis, A.I. showed us both Gigilo Joe and Jane models, Blade Runner showed us Pris, a pleasure model android, and of course, who can forget that wonderful bit of schlock, Cherry 2000?

Still, it's nice to see the "academic" community seriously contemplating such issues. (Robot sex: it's not just for fanboys anymore!) So this post is really more of head's up than an actual warning of dire happenings in the robot world.

Oh, and they also discussed how smart robots should be, whether they should be placed in situations where they could conceivably use lethal force, and maybe some other stuff. I kind of forgot the rest when I read the quote from one Henrik Christensen: "People are going to be having sex with robots within five years."

Too funny.

Slime Mold controls robot

What the?! Why would someone even THINK of this?
Scientists hook slime mold up and let it control a robot. Why? WHY? WHY?

Seriously, who thought this was a good idea? Let's think about the description of slime mold...
"Physarum polycephalum is a large single-celled organism that responds to food sources, such as bacteria and fungi, by moving towards and engulfing it."

Engulfing it! You're putting a very aggressive organism in control of a robot, and letting the robot learn.

Yes, it is a slime mold. Yes it is a simple 6-legged robot. But this is not a good place to start!

Robots with Tentacles

Apparently robots were having a hard time grasping or 'grappling' oddly shaped objects (Like People!) so scientists created a robot with tentacles to grab a greater variety of objects.
Thank heavens for those helpful scientists, for creating Octarm.
And thank DARPA for funding them.

Danger Rating: 7
They are still controlled by people, and don't seem to get around well...Yet.

And This Surprises Who...?

...or should that be, "whom"?

People have finally figured out that an attack by robot drones could pose a serious, possibly unstoppable threat. Apparently, they don't show up on radar as more than a small flock of birds, that is, if they're even noticed at all.

I imagine this could conceivably become the V-1 of the "War on Terrorism". Soon we'll start seeing machine gun nests springing up in cities across the globe as a pre-emptive measure.

Here's the plot of a movie that I can see coming out of this: Ter'ists build a bunch of these things, equipped with explosives, cameras, and full on remote controls. They surreptitiously place wireless repeaters at strategic locations across the city of Washington, D.C. They launch the planes/helicopters from a park in Maryland or Virginia. The controllers are sitting in the Starbucks on the corner across from the Old Executive Office Building. They're sipping cappucino and watching the progress from wireless laptops. To everyone else, it looks like they're playing some online game...

If there are any Hollywood types who want to talk about a script, RSVP in the comments section. I'm looking for at least seven figures here and a big name star. Sam Jackson should be available once Snakes on a Plane wraps. Oh, and I do know the difference between the net and the gross, and the definition of "residuals".

If there are any NSA folks reading this blog, my fellow Doom bloggers and I are available to brainstorm endless scenarios of robotic, er, doom, for the same seven figures mentioned above. You probably have ours numbers already.

Lego Watch continues

If memory serves this was sent in by alert reader Steve Q. They seem to be innocent -- albeit exceptionally time-intensive and bizarre -- Lego construction efforts. Though I'd keep an eye on #3 if I were you.

Danger Rating: 2 (they're still just plastic toys. Right?)

Love-Love Doll 2.0. Better use protection...

I'll let you be the judge of how bad this one is. On the one hand, it's an interesting training tool for health care providers. On the other hand it's, well, a robot birthing machine...

Twins? I'm at a loss for words.

Hal for the home

Now, I certainly understand the appeal of having a robot slave. A robot nanny named Jupiter that looks like Hal doesn't seem too terrible.
But then don't let it "emulate emotions"
Don't let it get on the web.
And seriously, what the hell is with the stake-for-arms stabby things sticking out of it?


Danger Rating: 8
They look harmless and cute, but there's a large potential for damage and destruction here.