Monday, February 22, 2010
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Friday, January 29, 2010
ROBO
Hello
Robo was the name my daughter gave to the robot I designed for to show at the local robot show at the science centre. I have been neglecting this blog and I am not pleased about that so I am going to remedy that soon. I have to figure how to add schematics to the blog so I can show the guts of this cute little machine. I would also like to add videos and a couple of pictures.
So as this progresses I would also like to share my thoughts about robots.
Take care,
Pius
Robo was the name my daughter gave to the robot I designed for to show at the local robot show at the science centre. I have been neglecting this blog and I am not pleased about that so I am going to remedy that soon. I have to figure how to add schematics to the blog so I can show the guts of this cute little machine. I would also like to add videos and a couple of pictures.
So as this progresses I would also like to share my thoughts about robots.
Take care,
Pius
Monday, November 2, 2009
Make Robots not War
There was a show called Robot Wars that was on weekly on the telly, the tube , T.V. It was a lot of fun to watch. The robots were not true robots. According to my robot mentor, more on him later, true robots equipped with machine intelligence are autonomous and self directing. The robots of this show were remote controlled from the side lines. The competition was light hearted and the machines were well built by their respective teams. The show in England went on for many years and I felt it gave the sport a bit more respect than the American version of the show.
The reason I am bringing all this up is that one competition on the American show stands out in my mind. This particular show featured a walking robot versus one that was very powerful. It was a mismatch for it took the opposition about two seconds to crush the life out of the walker. It was shocking and very upsetting to witness. I thought about the creator of the walker. He took the pulverization of his robot well for the cameras but my heart went out to him. I venture to guess that he was like most robot builders. He must have poured his energy and talent for uncounted hours that stretched into months. As his creation took shape he must have spent more than one painstaking hour to fine tune his machine so that it would perform just right. If that had been my machine and I saw it torn to bits I would have been devastated.
So I ask myself, if a robot builder does not want his work destroyed, what motivates those who build robots just to be destroyed ?? Obviously pure research does not figure into their equation. I am going out on a limb to state that profit, the accumulation of wealth is the motive behind the creation of these machines. By all means use technology to safegaurd the lives of our brave soldiers. The biggest difficulty is that these artifacts we are creating will have a simple, basic form of intelligence.
Here definitions will begin to crowd into my discussion. How we define the fundamental concepts is very crucial. The popular phrase used by the world to describe this kind of intelligence we are creating is "Artificial Intelligence". Does this definition derive from the artificial sweetner we invented to replace sugar. In mathematics the square root of negative one is called the j operator, the imaginary unit. The choice of the term is unfortubate for this particular quatity is not imaginary. It was introduced because people thought that to extract a square root of a negative number was inconceivable. My, my it seems we are at that stage when we discuss the concept of endowing machines with a simple form of intelligence. I prefer to use the term Machine Intelligence.
When it finally appears it will be a real intelligence, different from our own but existing and hopefully reacting in our environment. The ones used now in war theatres are remote contolled. There is always a man in the loop and they are not armed, unless you want to include a cruise missile as a robot ,but to me that is stretching the definition. Some definitions are so loose especially when it comes to robots that they are useless. Some are so weak that the old phonograph turntable was considered a robot.
As robots become more complex and their intelligence grow what will they be like ?? Will the money chasers disable all but the elements that make them slaves to the most vile commands that a man can give.
So now we have robots at war ,an obvious wrong. We will have robots with their potential short circuited for profit, another wrong. What did a wise man and gentle man say once, two wrongs do not make a right. We do not have the right to do this to our robots!!!
Take Care
Pius
The reason I am bringing all this up is that one competition on the American show stands out in my mind. This particular show featured a walking robot versus one that was very powerful. It was a mismatch for it took the opposition about two seconds to crush the life out of the walker. It was shocking and very upsetting to witness. I thought about the creator of the walker. He took the pulverization of his robot well for the cameras but my heart went out to him. I venture to guess that he was like most robot builders. He must have poured his energy and talent for uncounted hours that stretched into months. As his creation took shape he must have spent more than one painstaking hour to fine tune his machine so that it would perform just right. If that had been my machine and I saw it torn to bits I would have been devastated.
So I ask myself, if a robot builder does not want his work destroyed, what motivates those who build robots just to be destroyed ?? Obviously pure research does not figure into their equation. I am going out on a limb to state that profit, the accumulation of wealth is the motive behind the creation of these machines. By all means use technology to safegaurd the lives of our brave soldiers. The biggest difficulty is that these artifacts we are creating will have a simple, basic form of intelligence.
Here definitions will begin to crowd into my discussion. How we define the fundamental concepts is very crucial. The popular phrase used by the world to describe this kind of intelligence we are creating is "Artificial Intelligence". Does this definition derive from the artificial sweetner we invented to replace sugar. In mathematics the square root of negative one is called the j operator, the imaginary unit. The choice of the term is unfortubate for this particular quatity is not imaginary. It was introduced because people thought that to extract a square root of a negative number was inconceivable. My, my it seems we are at that stage when we discuss the concept of endowing machines with a simple form of intelligence. I prefer to use the term Machine Intelligence.
When it finally appears it will be a real intelligence, different from our own but existing and hopefully reacting in our environment. The ones used now in war theatres are remote contolled. There is always a man in the loop and they are not armed, unless you want to include a cruise missile as a robot ,but to me that is stretching the definition. Some definitions are so loose especially when it comes to robots that they are useless. Some are so weak that the old phonograph turntable was considered a robot.
As robots become more complex and their intelligence grow what will they be like ?? Will the money chasers disable all but the elements that make them slaves to the most vile commands that a man can give.
So now we have robots at war ,an obvious wrong. We will have robots with their potential short circuited for profit, another wrong. What did a wise man and gentle man say once, two wrongs do not make a right. We do not have the right to do this to our robots!!!
Take Care
Pius
Sunday, October 25, 2009
C.I.C. or SIC, Poor Robot
As I begin to write this blog on paper I am listening to a video about the beginning of World War 2. Behind the rise of those idiot dictators was the military. Armies comprised of humans have crossed all parts of our world for most of our history. It seems peace is always so temporary. Now as I write this I reside in a free country where I am allowed to say or think pretty much what I decide. My military in this part of the world safeguards me in my way of life from those who would try to take it away, disrupt and possibly destroy it.
We use technology to make life easier. New medical techniques prolong the life of millions. New medicines make life more pleasant. We also use technology to make machines to write our letters, wash and dry our clothes, light our desks so that I am able to write these words.
However all the technology that has been used in our past were tools that could be manipulated by those who created them. They had no will or even the smallest amount of intelligence. I mean that when I hit my hammer on a nail to hang a picture I don`t give it a second thought.
Sadly as I write this blog some 50 countries are using orcontemplating using robots in war. Noel Sharkey has a wonderful weekly radio show entitled `Sound of Science`. He has had some great shows devoted to robots. He has talked and written about robot use in the military. He and I are very concerned that not enough thought has gone into this application. Ironic that we are going to use machine intelligence and not think it through.
The use of the word `` use`` in the last sentence should be qualified. To use robots in war is actually misuse. To do this to those poor machines is just plain wrong. I get the feeling and I could be wrong, that they are going to be used to inflict damage and pain and not to serve tea to the front line troops. Peter Singer has written about this in his book `` Wired for War``. He too is concerned about the future. He states that there are some professional soldiers who hope that robots develop to the stage where humans can be left out of the loop. As it stands now the final command decisions are made by humans. How long before the advancements made will keep this as a viable option.
Yes we know that it would be cost effective to equip robots to fight and ``die`` for us in all the miltary theatres of the world. However those on the other side will have clever people so they too can have robots to do their fighting. So our future will be where robots fight each other for their creators.
As I end part 1 of this subject I see a few bright spots in all of the possible paths this future might take. Firstly a lot more people are becoming aware of this subject. The higher ups ,whoever they may be, are not paying any serious attention. However when this grass roots movement begins to roar, they will have no choice but to listen. Secondly I am glad this subject of building intelligent machines is particularly difficult. If it had been easier the whole picture would have ben a lot different.
Take Care
Pius
We use technology to make life easier. New medical techniques prolong the life of millions. New medicines make life more pleasant. We also use technology to make machines to write our letters, wash and dry our clothes, light our desks so that I am able to write these words.
However all the technology that has been used in our past were tools that could be manipulated by those who created them. They had no will or even the smallest amount of intelligence. I mean that when I hit my hammer on a nail to hang a picture I don`t give it a second thought.
Sadly as I write this blog some 50 countries are using orcontemplating using robots in war. Noel Sharkey has a wonderful weekly radio show entitled `Sound of Science`. He has had some great shows devoted to robots. He has talked and written about robot use in the military. He and I are very concerned that not enough thought has gone into this application. Ironic that we are going to use machine intelligence and not think it through.
The use of the word `` use`` in the last sentence should be qualified. To use robots in war is actually misuse. To do this to those poor machines is just plain wrong. I get the feeling and I could be wrong, that they are going to be used to inflict damage and pain and not to serve tea to the front line troops. Peter Singer has written about this in his book `` Wired for War``. He too is concerned about the future. He states that there are some professional soldiers who hope that robots develop to the stage where humans can be left out of the loop. As it stands now the final command decisions are made by humans. How long before the advancements made will keep this as a viable option.
Yes we know that it would be cost effective to equip robots to fight and ``die`` for us in all the miltary theatres of the world. However those on the other side will have clever people so they too can have robots to do their fighting. So our future will be where robots fight each other for their creators.
As I end part 1 of this subject I see a few bright spots in all of the possible paths this future might take. Firstly a lot more people are becoming aware of this subject. The higher ups ,whoever they may be, are not paying any serious attention. However when this grass roots movement begins to roar, they will have no choice but to listen. Secondly I am glad this subject of building intelligent machines is particularly difficult. If it had been easier the whole picture would have ben a lot different.
Take Care
Pius
Missing in Inaction
What happened to me all these long months???
I mean the reason a person starts a blog is to rant every so often. I like getting up on a virtual soapbox and letting people who are kind enough to read my words know what is happenning with me.
I have great excuses but in the final analysis there is no excuse for just letting the blog go silent for too long a time. I have read such boring articles by people who are suppossed to write for a living. It seems they are jaded or the subjects they are supposed to give us insights on are jaded. One of the best phrases I have encounterd was said by a very thoughtful radio personality. He sated that all of us are alloted a certain number of words each day. I wonder if we took that point of view we would be more careful of what we say.
Well I have stored my cache of words and there are a lot of things to write about. I let you in on my secret. Now mind you this one is not top secret so it is quite all right for it to be in cyberspace. Before I write in my blog I organize my thoughts and spelling on a piece of paper. I know it is old fashioned but it allso allows me to write several subjects at the same time. You would be amazed how thoughts open up so many windows in the mind.
One last confession, when I type in the blog I do so in the age old tradition of one finger at a time. I have seen with awe and fascination people who do not look at the keyboard and can type like the wind. In a word, WOW !!
Tonight will be the first on series of articles where I will let the known universe understand my view of the use of robots in war.
Take Care
Pius
I mean the reason a person starts a blog is to rant every so often. I like getting up on a virtual soapbox and letting people who are kind enough to read my words know what is happenning with me.
I have great excuses but in the final analysis there is no excuse for just letting the blog go silent for too long a time. I have read such boring articles by people who are suppossed to write for a living. It seems they are jaded or the subjects they are supposed to give us insights on are jaded. One of the best phrases I have encounterd was said by a very thoughtful radio personality. He sated that all of us are alloted a certain number of words each day. I wonder if we took that point of view we would be more careful of what we say.
Well I have stored my cache of words and there are a lot of things to write about. I let you in on my secret. Now mind you this one is not top secret so it is quite all right for it to be in cyberspace. Before I write in my blog I organize my thoughts and spelling on a piece of paper. I know it is old fashioned but it allso allows me to write several subjects at the same time. You would be amazed how thoughts open up so many windows in the mind.
One last confession, when I type in the blog I do so in the age old tradition of one finger at a time. I have seen with awe and fascination people who do not look at the keyboard and can type like the wind. In a word, WOW !!
Tonight will be the first on series of articles where I will let the known universe understand my view of the use of robots in war.
Take Care
Pius
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Top down, bottom up
Hello
I have been reading Michio Kaku's works and I have watched many of his videos. He makes very complex science understandable. He sees the near future as a time when man will master the new technologies he has developed and profoundly change the world and the way we live. One of the new revolutions is of course the intelligence one.
He realizes that soon we will be able to develop intelligent machines. These words have been food for thought. Know that before we can build anything it has to devised or formulated in the mind. Of course thinking about things and plans without a deadline are most certainly pipe dreams.
However we must be cautious when we are talking about robot building. the two main approaches have their strengths and weaknesses. Also note that we cannot straight jacket ourselves because new ideas and cocepts will present themselves. The true test is if the approach works.
The top down one is to produce a program where the world is simulated in he robots memory and it deals with that unreal real world. Every step and movement has to be regulated. The bottom up is to replace the big central control program with smaller not so comprehensive ones. This means these creatures would react and achieve a small result.
The first one has the flaw of being one step at a time and not really understanding the world out there. The second reacts to the world but it is usually limited to one simple action for no room for expansion.
The future I believe is a combination of these two approaches mixed with a few more.
Take care
Pius
I have been reading Michio Kaku's works and I have watched many of his videos. He makes very complex science understandable. He sees the near future as a time when man will master the new technologies he has developed and profoundly change the world and the way we live. One of the new revolutions is of course the intelligence one.
He realizes that soon we will be able to develop intelligent machines. These words have been food for thought. Know that before we can build anything it has to devised or formulated in the mind. Of course thinking about things and plans without a deadline are most certainly pipe dreams.
However we must be cautious when we are talking about robot building. the two main approaches have their strengths and weaknesses. Also note that we cannot straight jacket ourselves because new ideas and cocepts will present themselves. The true test is if the approach works.
The top down one is to produce a program where the world is simulated in he robots memory and it deals with that unreal real world. Every step and movement has to be regulated. The bottom up is to replace the big central control program with smaller not so comprehensive ones. This means these creatures would react and achieve a small result.
The first one has the flaw of being one step at a time and not really understanding the world out there. The second reacts to the world but it is usually limited to one simple action for no room for expansion.
The future I believe is a combination of these two approaches mixed with a few more.
Take care
Pius
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
