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

Extreme parkour with legged robots

extreme-parkour.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 195 posts

Re: Extreme parkour with legged robots

#121

Post by littlestymaar »

gumby wrote: post #64
croes wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once again, how does this improve national security? That's offense not defense. It worsens the national security of your opponent but doesn't strengthen your own.

That seems like a rather limited view of the word "defense", more appropriate to football or hockey than warfare. Even for that you could have these drones patrolling the territory/shooting intruders. But the word "defense" is much wider than that. Is the US supplying offensive weapons to Ukraine contributing to the national defense? Even if you feel the US should not be doing that, I hoe you can see the logic of peo…

> Is the US supplying offensive weapons to Ukraine contributing to the national defense?

It's not. It's contributing to European security, and as such is necessary for the US to reaffirm their suzerainty over Europe, but it's not really about US defense and even less about National Security. (I'm glad they do btw, because we European powers would have left Ukraine fall after deciding it would be too expensive to help them…)

Re: Extreme parkour with legged robots

#122

Post by Cthulhu_ »

riku_iki wrote: post #23

I am always wondering, why they build such complicated biology inspired robots, while they can build something with wheels and simple levels which allows robot to jump over obstacles and turn upside down if it landed on the back.

There are robots / RC cars like that, but they wouldn't work well on rocky surfaces for example; legs are more versatile.

Re: Extreme parkour with legged robots

#123

Post by isoprophlex »

yieldcrv wrote: post #104

Out of curiosity, is everyone of university age good at clickbait now? Like the whole point of saying “extreme” parkour is to boost engagement from pedantic analytic people like us talking about the hyperbolic title choice

The mainstream, state broadcaster in my country publishes youtube videos of news topics with SENSATIONAL TITLES and thumbnails with close-up REACTION FACES. On their home page, along with the written articles.

I hate what the attention economy has become. Old man yells at emoji...

Re: Extreme parkour with legged robots

#124

Post by golol »

croes wrote: post #48
gumby wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are vehicles that can navigate terrain a wheeled vehicle cannot. So they could do anything from operate as pack "animals" for infiltration teams to be armed drones that creep along the ground, harder to detect than a flying one.

Once again, how does this improve national security? That's offense not defense. It worsens the national security of your opponent but doesn't strengthen your own.

There is little difference between offensive and defensive capabilities. It's all about destroying your opponent. This helps national security because it is an additional and advanced means of destruction that the enemy might not have.

Re: Extreme parkour with legged robots

#125

Post by golol »

littlestymaar wrote: post #121
gumby wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems like a rather limited view of the word "defense", more appropriate to football or hockey than warfare. Even for that you could have these drones patrolling the territory/shooting intruders. But the word "defense" is much wider than that. Is the US supplying offensive weapons to Ukraine contributing to the national defense? Even if you feel the US should not be doing that, I hoe you can see the logic of peo…

> Is the US supplying offensive weapons to Ukraine contributing to the national defense? It's not. It's contributing to European security, and as such is necessary for the US to reaffirm their suzerainty over Europe, but it's not really about US defense and even less about National Security. (I'm glad they do btw, because we European powers would have left Ukraine fall after deciding it would be too expensive to help…

European security is national security via geopolitics. Being a global superpower has many benefits for US citizens.

Re: Extreme parkour with legged robots

#126

Post by golol »

croes wrote: post #77
XorNot wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think defense actually is in the current technological era? You don't defend territory with static defense's or force fields or walls.

Yeah, but do you think these technology can't be copied by others? Drones and robots made attacks easier, did that help national security? Countries like Russia or China won't attack because of nuclear weapons but groups like ISIS don't care.

> Drones and robots made attacks easier, did that help national security?

Yes because the enemy will have them eventually regardless of whether you develop them. Call it a Prisoner's Dilemma if you will, but it's the reality. Besides, unlike nuclear weapons, warfare with autonomous systems is not particularly more cruel than WW1 or WW2 style warfare.

Re: Extreme parkour with legged robots

#127

Post by golol »

dclowd9901 wrote: post #62
fuelfive wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glad to see our universities making progress in this important area of national security.

What a naive statement. Do you really believe no other nation is capable of making such a thing? This doesn’t improve our national security at all. Just ups the ante for robotic infantry, whatever the hell that ends up meaning. Like advancements in war technology has ever been a positive in the world.

> This doesn’t improve our national security at all.

You said yourself that other nations can and will make this too. Avoiding a decrease of national security is the same as improving national security.

Re: Extreme parkour with legged robots

#128

Post by andrepd »

Animats wrote: post #42

" A single neural net policy operating directly from a camera image, trained in simulation with large scale RL, can overcome imprecise sensing and actuation to output highly precise control behavior end-to-end. " So that's what it takes. That's so much simpler than the way Boston Dynamics does it, working out all the dynamics in simulation first. It's amazing to see this done from vision to actuators in one net. It's…

That second paragraph: holy mother of exaggerated claims!

Re: Extreme parkour with legged robots

#129

Post by noelwelsh »

foderking wrote: post #56
noelwelsh wrote: post #29

I'm sure this is impressive for an autonomous robot. However, as a fan of real parkour its kinda annoying to see some modest jumps and walking on a slope labelled "extreme parkour". What the robot demonstrates I'd expect any healthy 10 year old to be able to equal.

its actually hard for robots to compete with 10 year olds

For sure, but the paper is disingenuous in their description of the challenge they are supposedly tackling compared to what they actual achieve. Here's an excerpt from the introduction of the paper:

"Parkour is a popular athletic sport that involves humans traversing obstacles in a highly dynamic manner like running on walls and ramps, long coordinated jumps, and high jumps across obstacles. This involves remarkable eye-muscle coordination since missing a step can be fatal. Further, because of the large torques exerted, human muscles tend to operate at the limits of their ability and limbs must be positioned in such a way as to maximize mechanical advantage. Hence, margins for error are razor thin, and to execute a successful maneuver, the athlete needs to make all the right moves. Understandably, this is a much more challenging task than walking or running and requires years of practice to master. Replicating this ability in robotics poses a massive software as well as hardware challenge as the robot would need to operate at the limits of hardware for extreme parkour."

Here's an example of real parkour: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lp1oS0vXg0

They aren't doing parkour, let alone "extreme" parkour.

Re: Extreme parkour with legged robots

#130

Post by 90-00-09 »

riku_iki wrote: post #23

I am always wondering, why they build such complicated biology inspired robots, while they can build something with wheels and simple levels which allows robot to jump over obstacles and turn upside down if it landed on the back.

My understanding is that such robots do exist and have a different application. For example, balancing on longer hind legs by lifting the rest of the body up, then making a jump over a gap is likely easier than when using wheels.

In terms of landing on the back: if I remember correctly, one of these prototypes--from Boston Dynamics?--is able to rotate its legs 180 degrees to push off the ground when landing on the back.

Post reply on HN