Uh-oh, military robots:
This can't possibly end well. The robots are just going to rebel and oppress us. Don't these DARPA people watch any sci-fi?
« The Torture Issue | Main | Table »
Big Dog
18 Mar 2008 05:01 pm
Comments (46)
Looks like you can easily outrun them.
The most frightening aspect of this robot is its ability to crawl over rubble, of which there will be lots of in the aftermath of the robots First Strike. We won't even be able to hide in the nooks and crannies of our decimated cities.
Never mind that it sounds like Abbadon's hellish swarms of locusts.
TO kill it just hit it with your car. It works in Half-Life 2.
That's just plain creepy.
Zeroth Law: Don't go wee-wee on the rug.
Is it weird that I find that thing kind of adorable? Awww.... Look at it slip on the ice.
The liquid metal version is way cooler.
Groovy but pointless.
Fortunately, it sounds like it's powered by a 2-stroke chainsaw motor, which means that it won't have enough juice to power it's chaingun and 40-megawatt laser.
Fortunately, it sounds like it's powered by a 2-stroke chainsaw motor, which means that it won't have enough juice to power its chaingun and 40-megawatt laser.
Uh, what does it do?
Dang, double post. Sorry about that.
I've read that the military wants to use a 'bot like this as a mechanical mule, but I'm not sure I'd want one around me if it's as loud as shown in these videos (even less if they have 2-3 of them per squad).
KILL IT! KILLLLL IT! While we still can.
Ok, so this same post has been titled "BigDog" on at least 5 blogs. What is the reference, please?
I for one welcome our buzzing robot overlords.
"Big Dog" is the name of the robot.
re: what it "does"
it autonomously walks very well, even while carrying fairly heavy payloads. the robot in its current probably isn't of very much use to anyone, but you can be sure that what we've learned about autonomous robots (especially in traversing difficult terrain) will be very helpful.
I've read that the military wants to use a 'bot like this as a mechanical mule
A real mule would be cheaper and quieter. Plus the Special Forces guys could kill and eat them when they ran out of food behind enemy lines.
The way it plods along like that makes me think that it won't be any better defensively than its namesake, Glenn Robinson
I'm with scrod of this. I was raised with dogs and I love dogs, and that thing looks and moves enough like a dog that I was disturbed seeing a dude kick it. That was just an immediate, totally irrational affective response. Bizarre.
I want to knock that evil thing on its back and watch its legs loudly but helplessly flail at the sky.
I think we can assume this thing is not designed for conventional warfare, since a Chevy truck would be a little more useful. Ergo, it`s for counter-insurgency ops in jungles, mountains, etc. Against deaf-mute terrorists.
The robots are just going to rebel and oppress us. Don't these DARPA people watch any sci-fi?
Don't worry - Yoshimi won't let those evil robots win.
The buzzing, and that headless, animalian gait has to be deliberately designed to inspire fear. It kind of creeps me out, like something from Resident Evil. I agree that the fact that it stumbled and gets bogged down a bit in the snow is kind of endearing, though.
I was disturbed seeing a dude kick it.
I think he kicked it to show that the robot can recover from an unexpected impact, just as having it walk over ice showed that it could slip and recover its balance.
I love dogs, too, but that was just to demonstrate its abilities, not to be cruel to it.
Like to see it handle a mantrap designed for it...
Which of course guerrillas will start using five minutes after they see the first one in the field.
If it walks, it can be made to fall into a hole and get blown up.
Might be useful for behind the lines hauling stuff, but up front, in jungle, with stuff that isn't concrete - ain't gonna fly.
Besides, it looks nothing like this:
http://www.summer-glau.net/gallery/albums/1401/1x08_04.jpg
Richard, did you watch the whole video? Because it's shown moving through - well, not jungle, but other non-concrete environments, like woods, deep leaf litter and snow. So, when you say "up front, in jungle, with stuff that isn't concrete - ain't gonna fly", it makes you sound like an idiot. (And how well do wheeled vehicles work in jungle, anyway?)
Also, newsflash: everything can be blown up. The fact that this includes walking robots does not mean that walking robots are useless.
I don't think the noise issue is a serious one. I mean, vehicles make noise; doesn't stop us using them, even in counter-insurgency. Plus, this is a prototype - who's to say the field model won't be a lot quieter?
The point is usually that if there are people around capable of blowing up things, they will blow up one of these things rather than a person. And I am sure that they will get quieter, eventually get equipped with weapons, and so on, but I also suspect they will be remotely operated as opposed to autonomous, at least for the near future.
Love it when it canters. Not enough things in this world canter.
"Groovy but pointless."
Hardly. Later versions of this (which are sturdier, can right themselves and run on batteries/solar) would be enormously useful for unmanned exploration of planets and moons. NASA have been trying to develop things like this for decades, with much less success.
I would think that in the short term, at least, the Army wants something like this for getting supplies to the front line in difficult terrain -- not for assault. They actually had to resort to mules in Italy in WWII. Nothing with wheels will work.
I would think that in the short term, at least, the Army wants something like this for getting supplies to the front line in difficult terrain -- not for assault. They actually had to resort to mules in Italy in WWII. Nothing with wheels will work.
So, why not simply use mules?
Somebody gave a long list of answers to that on the parallel thread on Crooked Timber. The central one is that you have to feed mules whether they are working or not. Plus they are harder to transport than machinery, especially by air. So they really need to be procured locally, which may or may not be feasible.
Love it when it canters. Not enough things in this world canter.
I would be very interested to learn how they developed this thing's gaits. For instance, why is its default a trot? What did they find were the tradeoffs in terms of speed, stability and efficiency between various gaits?
It's hardly the intention, but I expect development of these kinds of robots will shed some light on the evolution of locomotion in animals.
Somebody gave a long list of answers to that on the parallel thread on Crooked Timber. The central one is that you have to feed mules whether they are working or not. Plus they are harder to transport than machinery, especially by air. So they really need to be procured locally, which may or may not be feasible.
Even at $4000 dollars per mule to purchase, those things are going to have to become real cheap to make them cheaper than 10-20 years of hay and an annual vet visit.
Incidentally, if any of you already own a good size truck and don't mind driving long distances, delivering mules to purchasers is a real good way to make a decent income.
Obviously robots are going to be far more expensive than mules for the forseeable future.
The advantage of the robot is that it doesn't require a human handler. That means you can send it into places where people can't or would prefer not to go.
Plenty of non-military applications in this category. Someone above mentioned exploration of other planets. Another use would be working in areas of radioactivity, extreme temperature, etc. When these things become available for purchase some of the first buyers will surely be fire departments.
"So, why not simply use mules?"
I imagine it would also be harder to repair a mule whose leg gets blown off by an enemy soldier.
"So why not simply use mules?"
Because defense contracts running less than half a billion dollars are a bit quaint, wouldn't you say?
"I would be very interested to learn how they developed this thing's gaits. For instance, why is its default a trot? What did they find were the tradeoffs in terms of speed, stability and efficiency between various gaits?
It's hardly the intention, but I expect development of these kinds of robots will shed some light on the evolution of locomotion in animals"
I don't know about this particular one, but many attempts to find optimal locomotive techniques for autonomous robots have used evolutionary algorithms.
I'll repeat my point for the retards.
This thing may be useful to offload a certain amount of work from the human grunts. I've got nothing against that. It's a damn good idea in that respect. And I can see the point of using a mechanical as opposed to an animal "mule".
But any notion that this thing will be effective against insurgents is simply nonsense.
Go look at the Star Wars movies where the Ewoks beat the crap out of the Empire mechanicals.
Same thing. This is why insurgents tend to win - they don't fight by "the rules".
But, hey, I've got nothing against robots in general. I'm just saying that trying to substitute robots for humans in a combat situation has a long, sad history in science fiction, as Matt pointed out. Only it isn't that they'll rebel against us that we need to worry about, it's that they simply end up failing to do the job because of their limitations vs humans.
Now if they ever have TRUE AI, then you can worry.
Which is, of course, why I follow the "Terminator" show - they're developing the notion of a really subtle, smart robot in interesting ways.
For example, they've taken the whole comedic notion of "marrying a robot" - and made it really sinister. The whole series may end being about the relationship between an AI and a human.
This is why "Blade Runner" was so sophisticated compared to other such movies like "I, Robot". When you can't tell who's the human and who's the artificial, it becomes a commentary on the human condition.
Watch this Youtube video of a segment of Terminator. It's a collection of segments about Terminators mimicking human emotions. The scene with Cameron and John was in the context of their discovery that the T-888 they had destroyed was actually married to a human woman. Cameron is clearly not acting like simply a robot here - she is actively trying to seduce John.
When Terminators mimic emotions
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2IIz3cTXGc
Actually, the number of Terminator fan YouTube videos posted with songs highlighting the likely developing romance between John and Cameron make it clear that this is an area of interest.
And you'll never have that problem with this "mule" robot - well, outside of a few rural hick types who might be in the military.
Wow, a noisy 1/32 scale model AT-AT (Imperial Walker) from Star Wars! Pretty cool, and I expect police, fire departments, and folks hunting for minerals in remote spots might find similar devices useful.
As for urban warfare - those spindly legs seem awfully vulnerable to something like a bola.
Not to mention remote controlled A-Wings.
Ewww. Looks like the offspring of an ant, a dog, and an Imperial Walker.
I'm not even sure how that is possible, but there you go.
Comments closed April 01, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
Pretty amazing. It will just add insult to injury to be oppressed by robots so goofy-looking, though. That thing looks and moves exactly the way I always imagined the "Puppeteers" from Larry Niven's universe would.
Posted by James Gary | March 18, 2008 5:12 PM