I have always been interested in robots, and mostly in how well they can get around.
And the thing that always disappoints me when I hear about engineers doing research with robots is that they always, always, fall back on the "it could be used for search and rescue" purpose of their creation.
It feels like a cop out of actually figuring out a real purpose. The likelihood of an incident in which search robots are actually necessary and available seems minuscule. I would much rather have everybody actually working on the rescue, rather than with some robots.
Just figure out a usage for the robots that is real and useful, and then get on with solving that problem. Hypothetical crumbling buildings is getting really old.
Kyler
1 comment:
I can see the bomb squad wanting to use robots for their work. Sure, you can send humans in, so it's not exactly necessary, but that's not the point. Bomb-diffusing robots is not a "cop out".
There are also plenty of robots that aren't search-and-rescue robots:
- the Canadarm, duh.
- military surveillance drones (which are actually in use)
- lunar/mars probes
- roombas
These engineers at McGill and Michigan(?) made a six-legged robot with spring-like legs... it was better at navigating difficult terrain than any other robot, ever. They were talking about sending it to Mars, because it could navigate terrain without ANY instruction from Earth. There's a TED talk about it.
Post a Comment