Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Mechanisms in Today's News — Parallax Forums

Mechanisms in Today's News

Comments

  • Methinks....
    A micro-controller without machinery cannot become a true robot. I suspect that the whole mechanical side will forever be necessary.
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,256
    I suspect that the whole mechanical side will forever be necessary.

    "Saints be praised!" cried Chief O'Hara and BSME erco.

  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    An awesomely insightful observation to be sure.

    What about the other way around? Robot's without micro-controllers?

    Robots with just neural net chips, or robots with quantum computers, or robots with some genetically hacked up mouse brains? Given sufficient nano-technology we could probably build a robot with purely mechanical computing elements. We already have examples of robots with nothing but analog circuitry driving their behavior.

    Ramble, speculate, ramble...

    Of course we already have "robots" that are totally devoid of any mechanical parts. They operate in the virtual worlds. Think google search bot.
  • LoopyBytelooseLoopyByteloose Posts: 12,537
    edited 2015-08-27 17:14
    Robots without micro-controllers have been around for ages... think music boxes and player pianos.

    And I believe there were steam driven looms that read paper tape to produce tweeds and other patterned weaves. Watch out for the flying shuttlecock.
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    Interesting point.

    Certainly "programmable" machines have been around for ages. Those looms your refer to were programmable by punched cards. Google "Jacquard loom". From that beginning we get those music boxes and piano players and indeed all the early business machines of IBM. All using punched cards or tapes.

    There were many "automata" built in Victorian times for the amusement of the rich that were driven by such programming.

    However, those devices were not computers as we understand them today. They lacked the essential ingredient of decision making. They could not change the outcome of their program by testing the state of, well, whatever. They could only blindly follow whatever pattern was on the cards or the tape. They were not "Turing complete".

    It is arguable if a machine built out of such dumb sequencer is a "robot" in the sense we understand today.


  • LoopyBytelooseLoopyByteloose Posts: 12,537
    edited 2015-08-28 15:07
    I guess I am 'not Turing complete'. I have trouble with decisions at times.

    I suppose I just want to go back to having restaurants with a tablecloth, flowers on the table, and a waitress/waiter. And I like the waitress/waiter to help me make my decision about what to eat.

    I can't seem to see how greater efficiency and more economies of scale are going to solve Malthusian type problems.

    Do we really want programmable robots making so many decisions, or don't we just want them to handle the drudgery and unhealthy work? From what I see, most industrial robots are painting vehicles or welding something.

    I fear the ones that are best at making decisions are all slot machines in Las Vegas.

    Meanwhile, the bicycle never seems to go out of style. I'd rather have a maid than a Roomba.
  • yetiyeti Posts: 818
    edited 2015-08-31 06:25
    Robots without micro-controllers have been around for ages...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo's_robot

    He had built a robot lion too:

    And maybe he even invented the driverless car: http://www.leonardodavincisinventions.com/mechanical-inventions/leonardo-da-vincis-car/
    ...ok... not a modern self driving car but a programmable machine...
Sign In or Register to comment.