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

How Boston Dynamics Taught Its Robots to Dance

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 207 posts

Re: How Boston Dynamics Taught Its Robots to Dance

#111

Post by exikyut »

wiz21c wrote: post #49
rendall wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are some hints with this excerpt: "Atlas’ current dance performance uses a mixture of what we like to call reflexive control, which is a combination of reacting to forces, online and offline trajectory optimization, and model predictive control. We leverage these techniques because they’re a reliable way of unlocking really high performance stuff, and we understand how to wield these tools really well. We haven…

"offline trajectory optimization" this doesn't sound good... I read this as : "we've made those robots do things they won't be able to do autonomously thanks to massive amounts of offline optimization". Sure it's impressive, but I wonder how it helps the casual viewer to get an idea of what these robots can actually do. One could say that's the whole point of PR but... It sure helped BD engineer to push their robots…

It's a demo.

Literally. Like in the demoscene sense.

And it doesn't matter that the robot couldn't possibly coordinate everything in the video on is own. The software doesn't just have to coordinate high level "go here, move like this", you also have the lower level coordination that sits between the collision avoidance and basic driving etc and the $gcode_variant driving the servos. I'm guessing that stack gets a major overhaul every time one of these videos gets made, like almost every Hollywood movie has a massive "software development" section because of all the artistic direction that needed new or changed functionality.

The original video showing Spot moonwalking had the most imperceptible of splices in it right at the end of the moonwalking bit. Several months' worth of development alongside careful use of multiple scenes in this newer video have mitigated the need for hacks like that. It's nice to see.

Re: How Boston Dynamics Taught Its Robots to Dance

#112

Post by ben_w »

b112 wrote: post #99
ben_w wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, but that’s a surprising direction to go in. Sure, this would make it less likely to use suicide bombs against soldiers — perhaps even politicians will put skin suits on the robots and use them for public appearances a-la Westworld for similar reasons — but grenades and RPGs and anti-material rifles and IEDs would likely all still be used. And £10k robots can also be used by terrorists, perhaps stolen from warehou…

Gun control is a uniquely US problem, at least in its current form. Yet this isn't going to have the same problem as gun control, for example, how easily can people obtain nuclear material? And terrorists? Sure, but an explosive truck is probably easier than one of these. And if sales are controlled, then they won't have a domestic army of them. In terms of hacking? 100% agree. It's why I find Tesla's OTA updates to…

> Sure, but an explosive truck is probably easier than one of these.

I disagree — $10k is much cheaper than a new truck.

Re: How Boston Dynamics Taught Its Robots to Dance

#113

Post by qayxc »

exikyut wrote: post #105
qayxc wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Looking at what the US military has been doing with drones, that scenario doesn't seem that far fetched. This scenario will remain science fiction until we invent a compact power source with an energy density (by both mass- and volume) matching fossil fuels. The military has no use for loud and cumbersome petrol-powered monstrosities like Big Dog (which is why the project was axed) or underpowered robots with an en…

Wait, Spot's power source only lasts minutes? Ah, its battery runs for 90 minutes.

> Ah, its battery runs for 90 minutes.

Yep, and that's best case, too (e.g. not running Lidar or complex processing for autonomous function at the same time).

Minutes sounds a bit shorter than it is, but nevertheless anything with an endurance under 2 hours cannot run for hours pretty much by definition ;)

Re: How Boston Dynamics Taught Its Robots to Dance

#115

Post by eeZah7Ux »

XorNot wrote: post #100
yarcob wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As soon as they make a usable remote control for that robot the US military is going to buy a bunch of them and attach machine guns and use them to shoot up "suspected terrorists". Looking at what the US military has been doing with drones, that scenario doesn't seem that far fetched.

Conversely an army of non-sapient robots would have a lot more options for dealing with belligerents. A human has to fire back when threatened because they don't want to die. A robot can take the hit, and risk being destroyed, because we can build another one.

Judging by the use of drones for "extrajudicial" assassination, the narrative of robots as merciful weapons sounds dubious at best.

Re: How Boston Dynamics Taught Its Robots to Dance

#116

Post by visarga »

Shivetya wrote: post #91
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This won't end well. Care to expand on that? I'm very cynical about Boston Dynamics, given that - as far as I can tell / know - they've only done tech demos and again as far as I know don't have significant commercial success, or their robots doing things outside of (carefully orchestrated) tech demos. disclaimer: I never actually looked on their website for user cases or whatnot.

Initially they will be a curiosity; robots in the public in general; but public perception is a tricky thing. There will be people absolutely terrified by their presence but some of this can be mitigated by how the robot looks; the more dexterous it is I am willing to bet will make it more scary to some. however the real bugaboo begins when one is used wrong regardless of where that occurs. like facial recognition we…

It's not something you can simply outlaw. Progress won't stop, those who oppose it just get left behind. The progress of technology is a force we don't have control over. When writing, the engine or electronics get invented everyone has to get onboard.

Re: How Boston Dynamics Taught Its Robots to Dance

#117

Post by dkarp »

bigbizisverywyz wrote: post #80
jessep wrote: post #2

My sister choreographed this dance, and I’m a little unhappy that she isn’t mentioned here by name. She’s brilliant, and I want her to get credit. Her name is Monica Thomas. Her dance company is called Mad King Thomas. Here is her brand new Twitter account: https://mobile.twitter.com/onetruebonc Her sense of humor is captured by her choice of the song “Do you love me”, which is a winking but still charming reference…

I personally would have loved to see a human dancer dancing alongside the robots, that would have given an interesting comparison.

Here's a 90s version of that from Alexander McQueen: https://youtu.be/ErE7O5NceGQ

Re: How Boston Dynamics Taught Its Robots to Dance

#118

Post by eeZah7Ux »

cbozeman wrote: post #7
jessep wrote: post #2

My sister choreographed this dance, and I’m a little unhappy that she isn’t mentioned here by name. She’s brilliant, and I want her to get credit. Her name is Monica Thomas. Her dance company is called Mad King Thomas. Here is her brand new Twitter account: https://mobile.twitter.com/onetruebonc Her sense of humor is captured by her choice of the song “Do you love me”, which is a winking but still charming reference…

There's nothing scary about these robots, any more than my Roomba is scary. They are tools, and like all tools, they can be used for nefarious purposes or for the benefit of mankind.

If your Roomba was designed by a weapon manufacturer to gain your trust you should be concerned.

If it had the ability to upload detailed maps of buildings you should be more concerned.

If it was designed as an initial stepping stone to develop into a smart and versatile killer robot...

Re: How Boston Dynamics Taught Its Robots to Dance

#119

Post by throwaway342422 »

blackrock wrote: post #18
cbozeman wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing scary about these robots, any more than my Roomba is scary. They are tools, and like all tools, they can be used for nefarious purposes or for the benefit of mankind.

This robot is Version 1.0. And yes, it’s just a puppet. For now. A human controls its movements. What’s missing is a brain. And that will come in Version 4.0. Or whenever they perfect a decision and control system, for fully autonomous decision making. That’s when you should worry. Or rather. You’re probably safe, if you live in one of the western allied nations. That is your privilege. But a black, brown, red, or ye…

> your 3rd world country had better accept democracy ... approved by Washington DC

...or accept replacing a democracy with an us-friendly "anticommunist" dictatorship.

Re: How Boston Dynamics Taught Its Robots to Dance

#120

Post by XorNot »

eeZah7Ux wrote: post #115
XorNot wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conversely an army of non-sapient robots would have a lot more options for dealing with belligerents. A human has to fire back when threatened because they don't want to die. A robot can take the hit, and risk being destroyed, because we can build another one.

Judging by the use of drones for "extrajudicial" assassination, the narrative of robots as merciful weapons sounds dubious at best.

A drone at 2 miles up isn't arresting anyone.
Post reply on HN