Open Dynamic Robot Initiative (2020)
open-dynamic-robot-initiative.github.io
Open Dynamic Robot Initiative (2020)
1–10 of 56 posts
Re: Open Dynamic Robot Initiative (2020)
#2It’s okay to say quadruped, rather than Boston-Dynamics-like, because there are significant differences and this is interesting in its own right.
Re: Open Dynamic Robot Initiative (2020)
#3It looks like they use an Antigravity MN4004 KV300 - 2PCS/SET [0] as the main motor ($145/2pcs).
Re: Open Dynamic Robot Initiative (2020)
#4Finally, as I get my proteins denatured by a quadruped-mounted face-finding energy weapon in Civil War II, I can go out singing Stallman's song.
You will be free, hackers. You will be free
Re: Open Dynamic Robot Initiative (2020)
#5Should weapons be open sourced?
Re: Open Dynamic Robot Initiative (2020)
#6Should weapons be open sourced?
As a robotics platform, there's nothing inherently weaponizable about quadrupedal locomotion over, say, a quadcopter. Weaponizing this system would be almost as difficult as developing and then weaponizing the system.
Re: Open Dynamic Robot Initiative (2020)
#7How does this relate to MIT's mini-cheetah(1)? A quick search didn't turn up any plans/code for the cheetah except some simulator software(2). Is this an open source 'work-alike' ?
1) https://biomimetics.mit.edu/
2) https://github.com/mit-biomimetics/Cheetah-Software
edit: I don't think the cheetah plans are actually open source ?
Re: Open Dynamic Robot Initiative (2020)
#8I have an tangential question about open source projects and names. "Boston Dynamics" is a trademark of Boston Dynamics Inc. Can using "Dynamic" like this project does cause legal problems, considering the name can be an allusion to the trademark?
Re: Open Dynamic Robot Initiative (2020)
#9Should weapons be open sourced?
As a robotics platform, there's nothing inherently weaponizable about quadrupedal locomotion over, say, a quadcopter. Weaponizing this system would be almost as difficult as developing and then weaponizing the system.
State actors already have the weapons, so it is not complicated to attach those to a tool capable of ferrying them over rugged terrain, with long battery life, and into hiding places of human opponends. Just as they attached them to drones, cars, and other gear. What guarantees that the biggest use cases and the most motivated users of this technology are not deadly? Maybe license?
Re: Open Dynamic Robot Initiative (2020)
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a robotics platform, there's nothing inherently weaponizable about quadrupedal locomotion over, say, a quadcopter. Weaponizing this system would be almost as difficult as developing and then weaponizing the system.
State actors already have the weapons, so it is not complicated to attach those to a tool capable of ferrying them over rugged terrain, with long battery life, and into hiding places of human opponends. Just as they attached them to drones, cars, and other gear. What guarantees that the biggest use cases and the most motivated users of this technology are not deadly? Maybe license?
I am skeptical that licensing could stop someone from using a project as the basis for a weapon - I doubt lawsuits would seem like much of a deterrent.
That said, I am not sure that a quadruped robot is much better for delivering a bomb than an RC car, other than a slight edge on rough terrain. Both would have an advantage over flying, since weight is a problem for drones.