Tai Chi Robots 223
dknight writes "It seems that Chinese scientists are currently developing a robot which is capable of doing tai chi. The robot is being developed by the Beijing University of Science and Engineering, and is touted to be a great breakthrough in worker safety, as these robots could be used to perform dangerous work. They are supposedly able to sense changes in the slope of the earth around them (hills, etc.) and balance themselves out."
Ummm... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Ummm... (Score:2)
Re:Ummm... (Score:2)
If it can handle easily being progrmamed to do tai'chi, something even many humans can't do easily, it has great usefulness.
So...slow... (Score:5, Funny)
>
Re:So...slow... (Score:5, Funny)
Robot: Whoa. I know Kung Fu.
Kierthos
I dunno about modding the robot... (Score:2)
Re:So...slow... (Score:2)
Re:So...slow... (Score:2)
Uh.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Uh.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Things that are pretty damn impressive for a robot.
Re:Uh.. (Score:3, Interesting)
The point is to have a human-shaped robot that is able to balance itself on uneven terran, while in various positions.
I am guessng that they picked tai chi becuase it's collection of forms with emphsis on balance, besides using it as a gimmick.
Re:Uh.. (Score:2)
Haven't you ever seen the movie "the Ice Pirates"?
Kung-foo fightin robot Action!
And then there's the whole thing about spectator sports...That'll really introduce programming back into the mix...I can see the best programmed robots fighting each other autonomously (not like battlebots...). This could be big...
no one said anything about martial arts... (Score:2)
In the case of a robot, it is simply a scripted set of basic, slow movements meant to mimic a human, and thus allow an audience to be able to identify with a machine on something more than a level that only requires an on switch. Sony's 'bots play soccer, and shake hands, as an example. Tagging that message as insightful is a joke, and clearly indicates the need for mods that allow for sarcasm
Sense of Balance (Score:5, Funny)
Why not just put the chinese robot on a Segway?
Re:Sense of Balance (Score:2)
Standards (Score:1)
Worker safety ? (Score:2, Funny)
I need one of these... (Score:5, Funny)
heh (Score:1, Troll)
It's good to see that when they aren't busy making draconian filters and firewalls that they are doing something useful with their time.. Tai Chi robots. Sweet...
[/sarcasm]
So when the robot gets to old for (Score:4, Funny)
I can see it now:
Robbie the Robot
Texas Ranger
Re:So when the robot gets to old for (Score:2)
How about the The Mighty Falun Gong Fighting Cyber-Force? I'd almost watch that. Can you imagine the geek following the Pink Robot would have?
Hmm (Score:4, Funny)
*ba-dum-chee*
Tai Chi Balance? (Score:4, Insightful)
A walking robot that can perform VERY complex motion sequences, balance itself, and respond in real-time to dangerous situations. These robots (or a later generation) could be used to perform rescue tasks in damaged buildings after an earthquake, when the danger of aftershock is still very high-so if the building did collapse, a robot would die, not an extra human being.
Re:Tai Chi Balance? (Score:2)
Re:Tai Chi Balance? (Score:2)
Dumbest idea ever (Score:2, Funny)
Lift one foot.
Raise an arm.
Even when I was a kid I had a toy robot that had machine guns shoot from its chest. Now that's a robot! At least make it a girl robot and have it do yoga or backbends or something.
Ok, I know you're going for the joke, but. . . (Score:2)
This is a *major* advancment in humanoid robotics if they've actually pulled this off.
KFG
Re:Ok, I know you're going for the joke, but. . . (Score:2)
Is this a riddle? I know! Because you only teach one-legged students.
Re:Dumbest idea ever (Score:2)
Credible? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Credible? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Credible? (Score:3, Informative)
I'm don't know what you searched under, but Google returns these results. [google.com]
Some [go2net.com] others [geek.com] have picked up on it, there are some loose [yahoo.com] translations [elcomercioperu.com.pe], but no real original articles. No pictures either.
Yeah, this looks a little vaporous. I hope not,the technology is certainly feasible, but I'm a little skeptical of uncorroborated articles in national chinese news sites. The japanese, however, have a robot [theinquirer.net] that looks promising.
More Info (direct translation from CCTV) (Score:3, Informative)
Taichi Robot story last night. It has a nice photo. The text is in chinese. I don't want to spend too much time for translation. So I just add a few extra points. The university names are my direct translation. They are unlikely to be the correct spelling... I am not a native Mandarin speaker.
I am not sure when/how did you do the search. I find [google.co.nz]
many links related to the posted story, although the content is more or less the same in everyone. It is not at all surprising. The reporters duplicated the official press release from englishdaily.com.cn. In a sense, Chinese is similar to Japanese. Many of these news are not for "export". They just publish the stories in their own language. You really cannot say it does not exist until you search in their own language (if you can...)
Re:Credible? - You didn't look very hard... (Score:2)
You must not have looked very hard:
China builds tai chi-playing robot (same article, different site) [theage.com.au]
Un robot imitant la boxe chinoise (from google cache) [216.239.51.100]
Article in Chinese with PICTURE [yzdsb.com.cn]
[harbindaily.com.cn] Another Picture [harbindaily.com.cn]
China construye un robot que practica el taichi (Spanish, I think) [xasa.com]
Chinese invent martial arts ready robot It can also surf the Internet, maybe [theinquirer.net]
New Robot Developed in China (with Picture) [china.org.cn]
Anyone have more (Score:1)
And it has to be able to make 50 step a minute to do 1 km/hour. That's a fairly impressive statistic for a self balancing bi-ped.
Does anyone have more info, or story from a reputable news site?
Forget that (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Forget that (Score:2)
bad sci-fi [imdb.com]
Keanu (Score:2)
I mean, do you suppose the robot will be able to kill him before he reaches the plug?
Quatrain (Score:1)
And they say the robot can do tai chi
Maybe I'm just missing something, but
Tai chi doesn't seem dangerous to me.
---
It's a joke, laugh.
They may have a problem... (Score:1, Funny)
I have a 286 chip lying around somewhere that I can donate.
My Obligations... (Score:5, Funny)
They are supposedly able to sense changes in the slope of the earth around them (hills, etc.) and balance themselves out.
They also can sense the emotions and ambitions of the humans around them, slowly feeding off of their pain and misery, and always plotting against us.
Something different:
They can sense the coming of the Singularity [caltech.edu] by using their advanced meditation techniques. Slowly watching us they are, gathing information, to make the elimination of the humans that much more quick.
Tai Chi Tamagochi Robots! If you feed them they'll grow into Tai Chi Masters, able to masterfully perform even the most difficult moves of Tai Chi.
COLLECT ALL 6 TODAY!!
(Only at Participating McHughs Restaraunts. While Supplies Last.)
It'd be cooler if they were powered by Chi.
NEXT!
"Li added that this type of robot would be able to take over some dangerous jobs from humans."
--As soon as I get my gun, I guess they'll have robotic telemarketers*. Now I need an EMP.
END!
New Movies Titles:
"Kung Fu Tai Chi Fighting Robots from Outer Space!"
"Tai Chi Robots from HELL!"
* I do not condone the shooting of telemarketers in this economy. But as soon as things improve and a better job opens up, say, anything, it'll be ok again.
the most important thing (Score:5, Funny)
I'd only point out that. . . (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, it has it's solo forms, typically practiced in slow motion, just as other martial arts have *their* practice kata, and just as these other martial arts have kata with partners so does Tai Chi, as well as full out sparing.
Don't be fooled by the new age types teaching it badly to Granny in the park, and don't take lessons in it from any instructor not competent to teach it *as* a martial art. They don't know what they're doing.
That said, any robot that can go through a Yang Long Form with me is a *major* step forward in humanoid robotics. Hell, it takes a great deal of practice and training for a *human* to do it vaguely properly and I want to see this puppy in action.
I wonder how it would do in "pushing hands"? That would be the ultimate test.
KFG
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:2)
Why in GODS NAME are they making a robot that can do Tai Chi? That's what old people are for.
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:4, Informative)
It's all about taking the bad guy's force and using it against himself.
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:2)
Ever notice that "blocks the punch and forces the arm of the opponent upwards" isn't ever used in boxing? Because it doesn't work, except when some decrepit Chinese guy is showing you in slow motion, and the other guy is making NO attempt to connect with the punch.
I'd like to see one of these "exalted Grandmaster of Flowers" types take on Mike Tyson. It'd be a real quick fight. "Ok, now to execute har flung kip in quick motioTyson lunges inPUNCH PUNCH PUNCH PUNCH SMACK 1....2....3....4....5....6....7....8....9...10!!!
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:3, Insightful)
And if you believe that technique is unimportant compared to strength, might I invite you to visit the Skip Barber racing school and take the Econoline Van tour, where the instructor races one of the beginner students. The instructor gets an Econoline van, and the student is in a Corvette. I'll give you three guesses as to who wins, and the first two don't count.
It's the same thing in combat. Proper technique and speed will slaughter brute force any day of the week.
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:2)
Yes, and Jean Claude Van Damne is a ballet dancer and their routines include not only that but doing situps one vertebra at a time. However, up against Chuck Zito, he was rapidly pounded into bleeding oblivion.
RE: And if you believe that technique is unimportant compared to strength, might I invite you to visit the Skip Barber racing school and take the Econoline Van tour, where the instructor races one of the beginner students. The instructor gets an Econoline van, and the student is in a Corvette. I'll give you three guesses as to who wins, and the first two don't count.
And I would invite you to see a bantamweight take on a superheavyweight, in any pugilistic sport. Technique wins if the people are equal - but the world's greatest karate kid is one punch away from being oblivionated by a large adult.
RE: It's the same thing in combat. Proper technique and speed will slaughter brute force any day of the week.
Yeah, yeah. Keep believing that. Only, one of these days you're going to try your flowery dragon rainbow monkey scissor kick against a no-necked behemoth, and you're going to end up in traction.
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:2)
Van Damme isn't a boxer, he's a very competent martial artist (kickboxing and jeet kun do) with fantastic technique (unlike, say, Steven Segal, but that's another story). He has much more in common with our aforementioned Grandmaster than he does with Mike "Lend me your Ear" Tyson.
Your second analogy about the superheavyweight vs. the bantamweight is also flawed; it's assuming that both have had the same training and are competing in the same style; a Tai Chi or Gung Fu master has had vastly different training than Mike Tyson; It's like putting a Nascar driver (in his Nascar vehicle) on a Formula-1 circuit; sure, in his element, he may be fantastic; but he'll be seeing exhaust fumes in F1.
Second:
I think your only experience with martial arts is what you've seen in the movies (most of which isn't real), and some of the *worthless* "self defense" and Tae-Kwon-Doe classes taught in suburbs and at junior colleges[1]. If you think that a Tai-Chi master is just some git who earned his black belt by attending thrice weekly for a few years, you've got another thing coming.
Third, and final:
I think you need to lighten up, maybe seek therapy.
[1] On a funny note, I once took one of those "self defense" classes for shits-and-giggles; hey, P.E. units are required, and it looked like fun. Sad thing is, the "master" couldn't joint-lock or throw me, and his student assistants (the "high level" students) were slow as hell -- too many Twinkies from what I could see; I accidentally injured one of the student assistants because I was expecting him to move his leg before I could kick his shin, and he didn't. I'm just glad I wasn't kicking full-force, or I would have shattered his leg!
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:2)
Yeah, and Van Damne got his ass kicked by Chuck Zito. I mean pounded up real good, by Chuck Zito. Chuck Zito did not get the gold belt and blue silk pajamas of Rainbow Flying Fish Monkey fist, he's a biker who's seen fights. When Van Damne said Chuck was lucky he slipped on some water, Zito called into the show Van Damne made this stupid statement on and offered a televised rematch. Van Damne couldn't backpedal fast enough. Gifted martial artist, sure. Fight worth a damn? No way.
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:2)
Happy new year!
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:2)
I've seen a lot of black belts rendered VERY un-cocky by larger, untrained fighters. Problem is, you see, they didn't throw the punch exactly the way they did it in class, you know, at about three miles an hour, in a huge arc, with no intent for it to land. Instead, the guy jabbed, or feinted. And then proceeded to hand the guy his own ass.
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:2)
*That's* where you get to prove what you've learned, and that's where - theoretically at least, but I've seen it in practice, regardless of whether you believe me or not - an experienced martial artist will always have an advantage over an experienced boxer of the same weight class.
You don't even need fancy flying or spinning kicks; a good sweep or a kick to the knees is easy enough, and something that the boxer doesn't train for.
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:2)
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:2)
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:2)
1) Gets ass kicked in the schoolyard.
2) Decides he needs "karate" or god help him, the most esoteric Chinese martial art out there.
3) Goes to tournaments, gets a honorary mention for his kata form
4) Makes mistake of thinking his secret fighting ultimate style will help him in a bar. Gets kicked around very bad.
5) Decides to take it out on students: Develops subtle psychosis where he psychs out his unwitting victims er students who pay for the privilege of being demonstration victims of a vicious throw into a wall or smacked hard in the xiphoid process with a punch (note that the student doesn't fight back for the purpose of the demonstration). Also, arranges for "drills" where he is pitted against a student in a very specific test of speed and skill which he's practiced far more, so he caroms his knuckles off the student's skull time after time, eventually intimidating and flinching the student and underlining his own bad-assness with his student population
6) Believes in his own godlike status. Takes on guy in bar who does NOT fight in the specific way drilled in class, and gets his ass kicked by SUPERIOR STRENGTH AND SPEED. Tries joint lock on guy whose arm WILL NOT BEND. Tries kick the guy sidesteps. Connects with "devastating fight ending super move" and guy strangely does not fall but instead grabs master's head and drives it very very hard into nearest bar obstacle (counter, post, etc)
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:3, Insightful)
Anyone who thinks their flying pyjama dance lesson will help them against someone larger and scarier is living in a fantasy world. EVERY pugilistic event has weight classes. Wonder why? Wouldn't the bantamweight with superior technique outclass the 300lb behemoth? No, the behemoth would pound the bantamweight into a red smear.
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:2)
Re:I'd only point out that. . . (Score:2)
Re:I only part agree with the rigged comment... (Score:2)
That's funny, I've never seen a Gracie do anything remotely like that. They either 1) stand next to the person in a big hug until the other guy tires and the clock runs out or 2) go into the "bitch" position and wait for the other guy to make some kind of move, hoping he'll make a mistake.
My Asimo style kung fu is unbeatable (Score:5, Funny)
Robots replacing humans? (Score:2, Interesting)
Just think, eventually they will be able to perform all kinds of work, not related to dangerous occupations.
Certainly they will end up being cheaper than the human worker over time.
I look forward to the day when robots are able to do nearly everything we pay manual labor for now. Then what the hell will we do? What will spurn our economy? Will the average blue collar worker work for the robots instead?
Animation replaces actors/actresses, robots replace blue collar workers, etc. etc. It certainly will be interesting to know what an ever-growing population will do with themselves, and how our economy will change in the next 100 years.
Every company (and even our President) wants us to run purchase more and more, but the jobs are decreasing as we're replaced by efficiencies through technology. I guess in the end we'll just ask one another, "Would you like fries with that?"
Re:Robots replacing humans? (Score:1)
You don't think a robot can do that?
Re:Robots replacing humans? (Score:1)
No, in the end we'll just be asking each other "Would your Robot Master like fries with that?"
Karl Marx was actually prescient . . . (Score:2)
The point of the matter is though that it's been quite a while since virtually all rote labor has been able to be performed by robots better than humans. It's been the humans that have been insisting on continuing to do this mindless, and pointless, labor in order that they may have "a job."
This last is just one of the symptoms of a social atmosphere based on humans as machines and their output as "the economy." Me, if a machine can do the job, I *don't want it.* Really, just kill me now if you have to. I'd just curl up in a ball and die of ennui anyway if forced to perform such laborious, yet mindless, tasks.
So what the hell do we do when the machines are doing all such tasks, as I believe they *should*?
How about what humans do better than machines? Think.
Maybe then we'll start to realize that the value and the purpose of a human being isn't to be a robot.
There's going to be a shitload of "shakeout" before that comes to pass though. Batten down the hatches.
KFG
Re:Robots replacing humans? (Score:2)
No money.
It seems sureal, but if everything need to run a country is automateed, what do we need money for?
Now that it has mastered tai chi... (Score:1)
Excellent...
tai chi (Score:1, Funny)
Segway? (Score:2)
Can a human ride on the robot's back and still have it sense and adapt to changing surface angle...like the segway.
On the other hand, the segway doesn't do tai chi.
-Pete
Re:Segway? (Score:2)
You kiddin' me? (Score:3, Funny)
I wonder.... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:I wonder.... (Score:2)
They better not ad any AI... (Score:2)
Who ya gonna call? (Score:2)
Let's see the Tai Chi robots take on Slimer!
Why not merge technologies? (Score:3, Funny)
Reputible? (Score:3, Interesting)
Can anyone find another source for this story?
-C
Shadow Boxing...FROM MATEL! (Score:1)
- Z
Jeff Goldblum... (Score:2)
(Courtesy of the SNL Celebrity Jeopardy skits - No, I couldn't resist.)
OK... (Score:5, Interesting)
Asimo already looked pretty much like a granny in slightly slo-mo. Now add taichi into the mix...that's a complex balancing act most humans can't even do (try it once, before you joke about it...stand on one leg, have the other in the air to the front, put both arms to the side of your body that has the leg in the air...what, you fell down? That's why it's hard. Now add movements to it, all the while balanced and controlled. And sloooow. Get it now?).
I tell you, the Japanese and the Chinese have a big thing here...hardly anyone in the west is taking this seriously (excluding some at for example MIT who are considered slightly strange), and consequently the west will have a HUGE disadvantage when housekeeping robots come out in ten, fifteen years time.
And this time, they're not kidding; look what's been done in 5 years time...from barely crawling (infant) to selfsufficient, internal powersource, full balance, near full range of motion (granny). The processing power is there, now it's just a matter of application and cost. And products like Aibo (which I hate, too) will cover dev costs.
This is a bit of a ramble, I know (champange has that effect on me
Thank god someone had the foresight...my IIIc made me feel I was living Star Trek, the next Asimo might make me think I'm living in Asimov's world. I love technology
Robots will never do Tai Chi (Tajiquan) - Why? (Score:2, Informative)
Robots can't do Tai Chi, they can only *mimic* Tai Chi movement...why?
Tai Chi (also called 'Taijiquan' - meaning "body as fist") is a legitimate martial art that has been bastardized in China and the West; it has also become something of a New Age phenonenon.
Why can't a robot do leigitimate Tai Chi? Because training in authentic Tai Chi involves exercises that essentially, over time, 1) dramatically retrain muscle fascia; 2) develop enormous leg strength in the practitioner (necessary; 3) teach the practitioner that *all* movement is controlled from the center (this is where the New Age people get it wrong, as we're talking about *literal* control from the area - front to back - just below the belly button (dantien). This latter quality is what's hard to imagine until one meets a practitioner who has it right. There simply aren't many of these people left, and those who are left tend to be very restrained about teaching everything openly.
Here are some good, authentic places to start - everything below is the 'real deal':
http://www.sixharmonies.org/
http://www.neijia.com/
Others to look for:
Chen Xiao Wang
Chu Tian Cai
Chen Zheng Lei
Wang Xian
Chen Qingzhou
Anything done by any of the above is the 'real deal'. There are also other good practitioners in other 'styles' of taiji. The above group is form Chen Style, the first Taiji style.
Zhu Tian Cai
The reason that Tai Chi exercises are performed slowly is to train the body to move, resting on very strong legs, and allowing the "center" to "leverage" the ground for striking and other martial moves. It's virtually impossibelto describe what this quality 'feel's like. There's no mystery to it however, as it can be trained to various levels depending on the physical ability and dedication of the practitioner.
Unfortunately, there are too few authentic Tai Chi practitioners out there who are teaching the "real deal".
Good Tai Chi practice doesn't have to be martial, **but the quality and basics of correct movement HAVE to be present** for it to be called legitimate Tai Chi.
Simply doing Tai Chi 'forms' fluidly is not doing Tai Chi.
In sum, the real physical dynamics and requirements of Tai Chi cannot be simulated by a robot. A robot may *mimic* moves that look like Tai Chi, but that's all.
Robots will benefit from Tai Chi and surpass it (Score:2)
It's possible to interpret your words as meaning that an authentic Tai Chi practitioner can harness some magical force or hidden power of the universe which is not available to the world of physics and technology. If so, we have no point of contact for a reasoned argument, since I don't subscribe to the concept of souls or mystical essenses.
If on the other hand what you mean is that Tai Chi is so exquisitely tuned to the needs of the human body and mind that a robot could not really duplicate it, simply because it is not made of flesh and blood, then I agree completely. However, notice that a robot would not need to do so anyway. A Tai Chi master at his or her peak is ultimately just a near-perfectly balanced machine, and such a state of power, readiness and competence can be the baseline specification for the robot at design time. Furthermore, once the robot is up and running then it can fine-tune its behaviour beyond that design baseline. Such robots will appear in time, as it's really just an engineering problem to be solved.
So, assuming that we're talking about the physical world and not something mystical, robots will indeed not really do Tai Chi as you say, that is true, but they will benefit from humans practicing the art, and then surpass them inevitably.
Having said that, the future is rosy not bleak, since mankind is on a path of self-transformation in which he integrates fully with his technology. Ultimately we'll all benefit from the work of Tai Chi masters, and to some extent carry their accomplishments within ourselves.
What they need to concentrate on... (Score:4, Funny)
Here's some videos (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.tokyodv.com/news/RoboDex2002SDR-3XSo
A bit ironic (Score:2)
Finally... (Score:2, Funny)
Sure, they can do tai-chi... (Score:2)
next breakthrough: buddhism (Score:3, Insightful)
Seriously. People without buddism kill other people or other living beings or bring other forms of suffering to other people or to other living beings. Such people live their lives without high-order goals (what's the goal to get many money if you loose them after your death). Even most of religious people (especially ones of religions based on dogmatic principals) are not usually tolerant to people of other reliogion confessions.
But once computers becomes actors in our eco-systems (computers now can decide on our behalf) then I would prefer to see such actors being peacuful, tolerant, non-violent, living their "lives" for good, loving and respecting other living beings.
We don't want to have computers with "ego" - living their "lives" for themselves (and killing us as their competitors or using us as slaves). But also, we don't want computers as stupid slaves, living their lives for "ego" of particular group of people (they would become solders-killers).
Of course, forcing computers to study buddhism should not free us (people) from the same job. We also must be peaceful, tolerant, respectful, loving and non-violent. Unfortunately many of us are not. And that't the real problem.
Re:next breakthrough: buddhism (Score:2, Insightful)
*Maybe* the pacifist element of Buddhism is currently more influential than the pacifist elements of Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism. Even so, Buddhist countries have made war on each other and others at many times in history, for example the two wars fought between Siam and Burma in the late 16th century.
I can't see how Jesus', Rabbi Akiba's, or Ibn Hallaj's (any pacifist Hindus out there pitch in) teachings are any less anti-war than the Buddha's. Frankly, you have already taken the first few steps onto the slippery slope by implying that Buddhism is the only way to peace. It's only a few short steps from there to the statement that all non-Buddhists should be destroyed as threats to peace.
In short, the virtuous in each religious group have more in common with each other than the wicked within each group have in common the virtuous. None of the world's major religions is inherently more or less virtuous than another and they have all been used as excuses for atrocities.
Re:next breakthrough: buddhism (Score:2)
Not at all. Buddhism let you to run any number of "virtual machines", each with another religion. You should practice it each time when it brings a peace, instead of continous arguing with other religion curriers.The other situation when the other will ask you questions about buddhism - you are happy to answer them as it will improve the knowledge of other people. But don't force them. That's the main difference of buddhism from other religions. As for wars, they are the subject of goverments, which are places for people who want a power, which is the goal of the material world and thus has nothing to do with buddhism (or with many other religions). When you are called for a peace - it should be, first of all, the peace in you soul, your thought and your actions.
That wasn't argueing for buddhism, but more an explanation. Speaking about other religions for robots, I think that there are three serious objective problems:
Hong Kong Working On Its Own Robots (Score:2)
Chi-Sau (Score:2, Interesting)
In related news... (Score:2)
The company is working on adding a third function (ornament in a rock garden), to be released at an unspecified time in the future.
Attack is inevitable (Score:2)
1) Develop a weapon out in the open.
2) Desguise the weapon as something people will like or might find useful and that's trendy(robot).
3) Program the robot to fight in a style that most people think is very slow, thoughtful, and for old people.
4) Mass produce and SELL SELL SELL.
5) Send millions to a wearhouses all over the United States for "storage".
6) Send the signal for FULL SPEED MODE.
7) Mass destruction and KILL KILL KILL.
I say we nuke them before they get their "weapons of mass destruction" plan under full steam.
With 2 billion ppl... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Another Use (Score:1)
Some things *should* be forgotten.
why not? (Score:1)
and the year before...
and the year before...
and the year before...
Ok, maybe you've got a point.
Re:Does it Follow Asimov's Rules? (Score:2)
That's why I suggest to program robots to study buddhism before teaching them any social activity (especially before Martial Arts).