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

MIT cheetah robot lands the running jump [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 212 posts

Re: MIT cheetah robot lands the running jump [video]

#31

Post by vlasev »

No one seems to be discussing how this can be improved! Here are a few points:

1. Real cheetahs don't run like that. The action of both pairs of legs is staggered for smoother motion and control. Check this out - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=131wvVGjZUc

2. Looking at this jumping-over-obstacles video, it seems like the robot is lacking flexibility. The real life cheetah's hind legs go quite a bit underneath in preparation for push off. Contrast this with how the robot's hind legs are a little too behind and the robot stutters a bit after every jump. If the robot could put its hind legs further it would make for a smoother landing.

Re: MIT cheetah robot lands the running jump [video]

#32

Post by davidw »

XCSme wrote: post #7

Well, it is very impressive, but still a very long way from what a real animal can do. What if the obstacle is at the edge of a canyon? It will suicide :D . Those tests are very restricted, but even after they will think the robot is ready, there will be cases they have missed in which it will fail.

> What if the obstacle is at the edge of a canyon? It will suicide

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_jump

Re: MIT cheetah robot lands the running jump [video]

#33

Post by snops »

codeshaman wrote: post #11
methodover wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ugh, I really dislike this sentiment. Even assuming the most extreme possibility -- that we create a powerful, sentient machine -- this is no different than what every species on this planet has been doing for a few billion years now. Creating life is what we earthlings do. And yeah, maybe that life form you create goes on to do horrible things. But maybe it goes on to do really good things. You don't know until you…

The main issue is that this advanced tech creates a powerful lever for mad leaders. 1 clumsy cheetah robot at MIT may not be that scary, but 100.000 fully armed and armoured killing machines, which can avoid obstacles and track humans with all kinds of sensors, under the control of leaders wanting to 'right' the wrongs of history scares the shit out of me. At the same time, this progress cannot (and shouldn't) be sto…

Your going to need some pretty advanced manufacturing to be able to make these for the forseeable future. I certainly can't see it being cheaper than humans with AKs for a long while, especially in the kind of environment where your "mad leaders" operate. Besides, the majority of "gain" is being able to fight wars without putting yourself at risk of casualties. A "mad leader" would not care about such losses.

The moral issues in this are no different to those of the use of drones, which are very well discussed.

Re: MIT cheetah robot lands the running jump [video]

#34

Post by pgeorgi »

Widdershin wrote: post #29
chinathrow wrote: post #23

DARPA again. Great to see more money flowing into military research. Irony off.

Is it ironic that I only saw this comment because of DARPA funding?

Otherwise you might have seen the comment because of some other funding (for example ITU). Arpanet wasn't the only development of its kind at the time, it just was the one that came to dominate the market.

Re: MIT cheetah robot lands the running jump [video]

#35

Post by chinathrow »

Cyph0n wrote: post #28
chinathrow wrote: post #23

DARPA again. Great to see more money flowing into military research. Irony off.

Military research is extremely important. The use of military tech in civilian applications is the reason for a lot of stuff we use daily, as I'm sure you know.

If we had less war on this world, I would be glad to have a few stuff less we use daily.

Seriously.

Re: MIT cheetah robot lands the running jump [video]

#37

Post by DanBC »

chinathrow wrote: post #25
icebraining wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

using something that's ground-based to impose control? I think we have that, they're called soldiers.

Yes - but replacing soldiers is happening and will continue. Having only machines on the battle field will lower the entry level for war.

Wait what? Those expensive machines make war harder, not easier.

Central African Republic has war with child soldiers using machetes and guns. It's an unpleasant truth: humans are disposable.

This is evidenced by a bunch of stuff - rich westerners have their clothes made by poor people locked into unsafe Bangladeshi warehouses; have many of our goods made by low people in terrible and dangerous conditions; by our lack of interest in garbage pickers or street children or etc.

Re: MIT cheetah robot lands the running jump [video]

#38

Post by sdoering »

posnet wrote: post #24
icebraining wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

using something that's ground-based to impose control? I think we have that, they're called soldiers.

Which leads to the appeal of a mechanized infantry that never gets tired, never gets sick, kills without remorse, follows orders invariantly, doesn't eat or drink, has an upgrade path but most importantly can't be killed only destroyed or broken. Sure the first generation won't replace all soldiers and they may never replace them all. We will need logistics and support people of course. Its not a perfect solution. Bu…

I do believe, that it is first not a question of money (being cheaper).

You do not have images of flag covered coffins returning home. You have no insubordination. You have the possibility to do economic promotion without being labeled as doing such (regarding international treaties (at least here in the EU)). You do not need all these training facilities.

Just to name a few.

So they will even do it, if it is not cheaper to do (imho). And logistics can be automated as well (delivery by drones, something like fueling done by other drones, and so on).

I believe we will see drone-carriers analog to aircraft-carriers being at least semi autonomous as well within our lifetime.

Re: MIT cheetah robot lands the running jump [video]

#39

Post by jeremyjh »

vlasev wrote: post #31

No one seems to be discussing how this can be improved! Here are a few points: 1. Real cheetahs don't run like that. The action of both pairs of legs is staggered for smoother motion and control. Check this out - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=131wvVGjZUc 2. Looking at this jumping-over-obstacles video, it seems like the robot is lacking flexibility. The real life cheetah's hind legs go quite a bit underneath in pre…

Perhaps the engineers who designed cheetah did learn about how real Cheetahs run, but there are other constraints that are not obvious.

Re: MIT cheetah robot lands the running jump [video]

#40

Post by interdrift »

jeremyjh wrote: post #39
vlasev wrote: post #31

No one seems to be discussing how this can be improved! Here are a few points: 1. Real cheetahs don't run like that. The action of both pairs of legs is staggered for smoother motion and control. Check this out - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=131wvVGjZUc 2. Looking at this jumping-over-obstacles video, it seems like the robot is lacking flexibility. The real life cheetah's hind legs go quite a bit underneath in pre…

Perhaps the engineers who designed cheetah did learn about how real Cheetahs run, but there are other constraints that are not obvious.

That's very likely considering what they are building.
Post reply on HN