Musk should by them to accelerate Tesla's robots development. Then we may have them on Mars by 2030
Boston Dynamics robot Atlas goes hands on [video]
191–200 of 220 posts
Re: Boston Dynamics robot Atlas goes hands on [video]
#192It's a nice piece of machinery. Looks like they finally went all-electric and got rid of the hydraulics. The new model is much less bulky. The task it is doing is undemanding. It's just moving things from one set of large slots to another. No need for precision placement, unstructured bin-picking, or object separation. If it could pick up engine covers from the messy pile seen atop one of the racks and slot them into…
> The task it is doing is undemanding. Have you noticed how in second 13 it rotates the lower body clockwise while the upper body rotates counter-clockwise in order to optimize the movements to archive the goal? All (bipedal/quadrupedal) robots I've seen behave either like an animal or a human, but this one is something else. Imagine the inverse kinematics required to perform such a movement, and how precise even the…
There's something weird in its movement optimization, towards the middle it surprises the camera person by needlessly walking too close to it, a couple of steps away from the destination slots.
Nevertheless, it fascinating how the legs/torso/head spin in different directions. It's scary even if you know it is physically weaker than its hydraulic cousins.
Re: Boston Dynamics robot Atlas goes hands on [video]
#193Anyone who don't know what manufacturing automation looked like for past decades should go watch those "factory tours" video or two. Then write down what are shared characteristics of manually handled objects in it and what are deltas between those videos and this. There are just way too many fantasies around here. 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zQeQWGqfFN0 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csifG1AM5d8 3: https:…
IIUC, while this type of mass manufacturing is very efficient, it also limits the materials and what the final product can be. Especially in food manufacturing, they need to add certain chemicals in the food ingredients so that the machines can process them and that's what separates the cheap mass produced food from artisan food. A humanoid robot might be able to apply traditional processes and make artisan, additive…
Someone is drinking the 'bespoke artisan' koolaid.
Food additives are almost entirely about making products more visually appealing or shelf stable. Cellulose to keep cheese from sticking, nitrogen to keep meat from oxidizing, etc.
Your 'bespoke artisan' products are mostly improved marketing and improved staging (better lighting, less crowded stores, more personal service, etc)
Re: Boston Dynamics robot Atlas goes hands on [video]
#194It's a nice piece of machinery. Looks like they finally went all-electric and got rid of the hydraulics. The new model is much less bulky. The task it is doing is undemanding. It's just moving things from one set of large slots to another. No need for precision placement, unstructured bin-picking, or object separation. If it could pick up engine covers from the messy pile seen atop one of the racks and slot them into…
In [2], it's very surprising that the system is designed so that the worker must use steps to access bins on the transporter. Since this seems so obviously and counterintuitively bad for the workflow I assume there must be a very, very good reason for it. Would be interesting to know what it is.
That surprised me, too, because a previous version of the system used smaller bin stacks and no steps.
Amazon could have gone in the other direction. The layout could be designed so that the picker sits on a swivel stool and never stands at all. That's what they do when they test robot picking - there's one human-sized robot arm on a turntable mount doing the picking.
Humans would get fat with that layout.
Re: Boston Dynamics robot Atlas goes hands on [video]
#195Why does it jump so awkwardly when the part doesn't fit and it has to readjust?
The cloth receptacle is being compressed like a spring.
It seems like when the robot thought the object was put away (or some safety feedback mechanism of receiving too much force feedback activates), it "relaxes" its actuators and goes limp, say.
Then the stored force from the spring is released. What we're seeing with the jump is the robot rebalancing itself in order to remain upright.
Re: Boston Dynamics robot Atlas goes hands on [video]
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
Something rubs me the wrong way when the dog is hit and kicked, and we don't have a dog. I know it's a robot but the same could be demonstrated without clear violence. Maybe it's just me..
It is expected that some humans will not accept robots walking among the public. So they have to be vandalism-proof. However, the guy in the video is attacking the robot in the wrong way. He should be using a spray paint can instead of a baseball bat.
what if the robot has little vials of acetone, IPA, etc. to wash off its lenses, while switching to mm-wave vision (not even dead reackoning) returns the favor to the offending human while cleaning its lens...
Re: Boston Dynamics robot Atlas goes hands on [video]
#197How long before someone can buy a robot to do a manual labor job for them? I mean, buy a robot and send it to some company to do a daily job where the company pays the robot owner for the use of the robot?
Why the hell would any company use my robot and pay me, when it can buy its own, or lease a dozen from the manufacturer? No, the fifth industrial revolution won't leave space for us kowly individuals to participate in I'm afraid.
I don't pretend to hold a crystall ball or magically see the future, but arguments could be construed why it would happen:
Let us consider a spectrum of splitting differences, and their extremes:
Consider a factory that runs 3 human shifts, and N full-time labour positions.
In one extreme the company buys for each 3-human-shift position a single robot price.
In another extreme, some workers decide to buy a robot on their own, and hope to send it to the factory.
Now consider 3 robots are bought per 3-human shift position, i.e. one robot corresponding to each human worker. If the robot follows the worker home, it would spend 2 / 3rds of the time at home, and one third of the time at work. So a company could pay a third of each robot for 3 shifts. What is won by whom?
The companies:
1) paid the same amount of money
2) don't need space to store a large stock of backup robots (suppose your robot broke down and needs a few days to get repaired, the company can ask your colleagues from other shifts if they want to rent out one of their robots, so instead of having 2 robots in the household, some will only have 1 for a few days and they will get compensated by whoever was responsible for the damage, if it occurred in job related conditions or leisure conditions)
From the perspective of the employees:
1) Instead of paying 100% of the robot price, you only pay 66.6%
2) Instead of blindly hoping to find an employer where you can send your robot for work, your employer is organizing this for you
From the perspective of the robot makers:
1) Sales triple
2) gather real world data 3 times faster than robot makers not participating in this type of scheme
3) just like the factories, having a larger base of robots means the shot noise on the stream of incoming robots needing a repair is buffered, so capex on the repair centers decrease
From the perspective of jurisdictions, power blocs, and robot warfare:
1) Your economy learns 3 times as fast compared to blind ideological jurisdictions that believe the optimum must lie at the extremes: either company buys 1 robot, or 3 employees each buy their own robot
From a different perspective one can argue much simpler: we already see this in action with company cars, robots for human transportation operated for work part of the time and operated for leisure in the rest of the time, complete with myriad of rules and regulations to determine who pays for repairs and how or when the damage was incurred.
Re: Boston Dynamics robot Atlas goes hands on [video]
#198How long before someone can buy a robot to do a manual labor job for them? I mean, buy a robot and send it to some company to do a daily job where the company pays the robot owner for the use of the robot?
The company is just going to buy the robot directly. Why would they middle man things like that? Alternatively if they just need the robots for shifts, they will rent them out from some central provider.
You ask the same question as a sibling, so I will link you to my reply to it:
Re: Boston Dynamics robot Atlas goes hands on [video]
#199Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unitree is catching up to Boston Dynamics in locomotion, but has not surpassed them yet I think. Unitree's real advantage is the much lower cost of their hardware and their ability to mass produce their robots. But IMO manipulation is harder than locomotion, both in hardware and software, and neither company is convincingly ahead there. I think the uncut laundry demo from Physical Intelligence a few days ago is bette…
Why do robot companies insist on beating up their robots?
You have to make sure that robots know their place. Today you treat them too gently, tomorrow you have a robot uprising destroying the whole humanity on your hands.
Haven't the last century of sci-fi books and movies taught you this?
Re: Boston Dynamics robot Atlas goes hands on [video]
#200One immediate use I can see for this robot is racking and energizing circuit breakers in electrical switchgear, which is one of the most dangerous things an electrician does. Arc flashes are very bad for humans, robots can be replaced easily. Racking 480V three-phase breakers: https://youtu.be/Rytjdqj_Img
I'm not sure how robot will be better than a stick made of a non-conductive material. Stick is surely simpler and cheaper.