Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Do You Love Me? [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 478 posts

Re: Do You Love Me? [video]

#211

Post by 2muchcoffeeman »

high_byte wrote: post #193
avmich wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Many of their robot models don't seem to exist for actual products, they just exist for marketing. Wow :) I was under impression that, while Atlas is a flagship model with broad purposes, the other two are rather optimized transporting (and some other miscellaneous functions) robots, for specific applications. Why do you think they couldn't find use as products?

I think most of their robots are more research than product, except maybe most recent models like spot. It's first and foremost an amazing engineering for the sake of engineering.

BD is basic research. Figuring out what can be done and what the potential applications are. I’m surprised BD has gone through so many sales. Whoever owns them in the end is going to make a ton of money I reckon.

Re: Do You Love Me? [video]

#212

Post by TaylorAlexander »

fermienrico wrote: post #196
TaylorAlexander wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s all very cool looking. However when I watched this video my first thought was “my god they’re going to bring the drone wars to the ground.” I am a robotics engineer and have been focused on robotics my whole life. I worked at Google X on a robotics team with some great ex-Boston Dynamics people, and some of my friends have since gone to work for them. So I do understand what they have achieved. It’s fantastic fr…

It's weird to pick one point in the abstraction chain of human technological progress and create a threshold of unethical behavior. Technological progress will gaurantee this scenario of military use. If not BD, it will be another company. If not now, it will. If not the US, it will be someone else - China, Russia, etc. I don't see anypoint in feeling sad about just some geeks making robots as much as we didn't becom…

I think it’s important to talk about the concerns related to military robots well before they reach deployment so the public is primed to criticize leaders who would claim their use will be justified. When should we talk about it if not on the release of amazing new capabilities sure to catch the eye of military officials?

Re: Do You Love Me? [video]

#213

Post by djohnston »

miraculixx wrote: post #183
unwoundmouse wrote: post #64

Jesus y'all are so cynical, commenting on how these are war bots and gonna automate everything away, I just think it's an engineering marvel that these insanely complex robotic maneuvers can be done so fluidly now

Yea, it's very impressive engineering. However there is no intelligence in these machines. It's a clever combination of hard- and software. Takes human intelligence to build it. Bottom line. Machines. Not Intelligent.

Yeah I think that's always been the appeal of BD, they are bleeding edge in terms of mechanics / robotics. The brains are being developed by entirely different companies, but eventually they'll meet one another.

Re: Do You Love Me? [video]

#214

Post by viraptor »

mabbo wrote: post #162
6gvONxR4sf7o wrote: post #65

So what's the main barrier to using these industrially? Is it reliability? Did this video a zillion takes? Is it manufacturing? Maybe it's hard to scale them up? Is it battery life? Maybe it can power itself for just a few minutes? Is it object manipulation or sensing/world understanding? Maybe it can't apply the right forces to a soft thing or a flexible thing or know what it can step on vs over or what will move or…

> So what's the main barrier to using these industrially? In an industrial setting, a purpose-built robot will outdo these robots, or a human, at nearly all tasks. And whatever these things are doing, likely a human can do it better with a little bit of training- that's low capital cost compared to these robots. Carrying things around? Conveyor belts. Picking things up? Robot arms. Going up and down stairs? Elevators…

And a new edition of robot wars. We deserve to see the human-like robots doing realistic sword fights.

Re: Do You Love Me? [video]

#215

Post by kostarelo »

neilpanchal wrote: post #106

I am a huge fan of spartan-like no-bullshit brutalist approach towards their marketing/PR: - No studio setup, just their lab - No artificial lighting - No fucks given about hiding the mess - Robots going through surgery in the background - Song is classy af IMO - Can see the camera man - Can see the engineers/employees - Framing/cinematography isn't as polished (this is a feature, not a bug) - Chipped paint, beaten u…

It doesn’t look like they’re marketing their brand to me, more like they’re having fun.

Re: Do You Love Me? [video]

#216

Post by viraptor »

unwoundmouse wrote: post #64

Jesus y'all are so cynical, commenting on how these are war bots and gonna automate everything away, I just think it's an engineering marvel that these insanely complex robotic maneuvers can be done so fluidly now

It can be an engineering marvel and practically useless in the industry at the same time. I do love the dancing though. And the fact they actually went for boogie-like steps and a choreography rather than a more technical presentation.

Re: Do You Love Me? [video]

#217

Post by cududa »

lacker wrote: post #147
neilpanchal wrote: post #106

I am a huge fan of spartan-like no-bullshit brutalist approach towards their marketing/PR: - No studio setup, just their lab - No artificial lighting - No fucks given about hiding the mess - Robots going through surgery in the background - Song is classy af IMO - Can see the camera man - Can see the engineers/employees - Framing/cinematography isn't as polished (this is a feature, not a bug) - Chipped paint, beaten u…

It's a cool ad, but it doesn't seem to be "spartan / brutalist" marketing to me. The point of the ad is to show you how their technology makes robots dance. But, clearly their real product isn't just dancing robots. They put a lot of work into making this functionality, and all that work is just for marketing! To me, a real spartan approach to marketing is spending very little money on marketing, and just focusing on…

I don’t think you properly understand “spartan”/ brutalist. The video is using the materials in their most outrageous but possible form to demonstrate their flexibility, and executed in an imposing way. How’s that not brutalist?

Re: Do You Love Me? [video]

#218

Post by meowkit »

one2know wrote: post #127
11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #7

First reaction: It's official. I am very afraid. Second reaction: When's the OK Go video released? Third reaction: They paid Boston Dynamics engineers to do this ?

Why would anyone be afraid of these? You should be afraid of stealth drones three miles up with air to ground missiles. They are unstoppable without electronic countermeasures.

Its a bit harder to control how much collateral damage occurs with A2G missiles. Put a rifle on a humanoid robot or small explosive on a drone like in Slaughterbots and that’s much more terrifying.

Re: Do You Love Me? [video]

#219

Post by manbash »

renewiltord wrote: post #194

So what's the deal with these guys? Obviously their tech is pretty cool since I remember the control and feedback problem for bipedal bots being described as really hard when I was growing up. Obviously their consumer marketing is great since everyone looks at these things and loves them. But they don't have a product. What's the problem? My guesses: * No one really needs this shit * They have a control/feedback prob…

One actual use-case of DARPA ("The Military") is to deploy such robots in disaster-stricken areas instead of risking human. For example, emergency maintenance in a power plant that has suffered a nuclear meltdown accident.

Re: Do You Love Me? [video]

#220

Post by hmottestad »

renewiltord wrote: post #194

So what's the deal with these guys? Obviously their tech is pretty cool since I remember the control and feedback problem for bipedal bots being described as really hard when I was growing up. Obviously their consumer marketing is great since everyone looks at these things and loves them. But they don't have a product. What's the problem? My guesses: * No one really needs this shit * They have a control/feedback prob…

They are still trying to figure out their market. They are essentially selling a product the world isn’t quite ready for.

If it was dirt cheap I would buy one, attach a vacuum to it and have it clean my place. But they are super expensive, so fat chance of that.

Spot, the yellow dog, seems to be targeted at the notion of human safety. Think something like a building demo job gone wrong, send in the robot to pull out the dynamite.

In Norway they are being tested on oil platforms. If this robot can be used to fix one single problem on a platform that would otherwise have required a production shutdown...it’ll pay for itself several (hundred?) times over. This is especially the case for older platforms where you need to be more hands on and less can be done remotely.

We had a mountain side in Norway that was near collapsing and all the residents below it were evacuated every two weeks. The geologists wanted to use dynamite to dislodge it, but it was too dangerous for humans. In the future we might send a versatile robot like Spot up in a drone and have him plant the explosives. If he blows up in the process that would obviously suck, but still fairly cheap for what he would have accomplished.

Post reply on HN