»Not really a theory, but something freaky«

Doo doo doo doo doo doo doo doo...

they mentioned "vocal expression circuitry" within this robot thing.

vocal expression circuitry?

if this thing is REALLY smart and really has AI then its fake =P AI has not yet been achieved. Of the "AI" you hear in computer games or chat bots... they're fake... observe them and you'll find out that they do the same thing over and over again.

=P

i don't know, but I thought it was pretty bizzare.

Quote:

they're fake... observe them and you'll find out that they do the same thing over and over again.

Sounds almost human eh?

Quote:

Sounds almost human eh?

haha well good point people DO make the same mistakes/do things over and over again.

Haha...a very dull, boring human is still a human. Even though he/she has the same routine day in and day out of getting up in the morning, having breakfast, going to work, coming home, family time or whatever, sleeping...there may be slight variations in each area of life, but just because he/she is repettitive/boring does not revoke his/her humanity. Very interesting...

haha yeh those 'chatbots' are kinda stupid. too repetitive

Human: Hello.
Chat Bot: Hello.
Human: Where are you from?
Chat Bot: I am from San Fransisco.
Human: Where are you from?
Chat Bot: I am from San Fransisco.
Human: Where are you from?
Chat Bot: I am from San Fransisco.
Human: Haha this is fun
Chat Bot: What is fun?
Human: Where are you from?
Chat Bot: I am from San Fransisco.

Didn't a fella in Japan create an almost fully intelligent AI machine a few years ago? Built like a human and all. I'd say these things will be our slaves in 40-50 years, maybe less, I just hope I'm dead before they start enslaving humanity. I imagine we won't be smart enough to block out the sky before they kill us all.

Yes, I'm an optimist.

movie.

haha then we should start killing them b4 they kill us! hope for success!

This is not a legitimate site. It's a promotion for a movie. I've seen the poster for at the theater and on the matrix web site. That brings me t omy next point;
Doesn't that robot look very similar to the butler model shown in the animatrix? A prequel perhaps? I'm sure if it is, Larry and Andy won't put it out in the open.

It's an advert for a movie version of the Issac Asimov short story "I, Robot". Hence the three laws that it keeps mentioning.

Let's hope it's better than that crummy movie of Bicentennial Man that starred Robin Williams.

the butler robot.... maybe... but this one didn't have a bow tie

That robot website...very interesting...If you click on the "Learn More" button and then under the "Evolution" menu, select "Logic."

In the summary of the logics of the robot, it states,

Quote:

Best Intentions, flawless engineering and state of the art materials aside, not a single NS-5 component made its way from a sketch pad or schmatic file until Dr. Lanning was completely satisfied with his now seminal 3 Laws Safedirective. Without Dr. Lanning's Laws, the NS-5, and the future of domestic robot assistants, would be nothing more than a dream.

No offense to Dr. Lanning here, but there have been a lot of technological breakthroughs that were made "with the best intentions" and which were flawless by design. Hate to say it, but I really wish they wouldn't develop this any further. Kinda wish we could keep it as a dream, nothing more. Too many things that could go wrong. I don't like it one bit.

I know reading isn't in vouge very much now a days but please read Isaac Asimov's I, Robot and his other works before flipping out over this website. The website is an advertisement for a movie that is based on his works.

BTW, The 3 laws are
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

So in Asimov's world, Robots never go on murder sprees, killing humans with the idea of world conquest. (And before you say "I have never heard such a wimpy theory in my life!") I should let you know that Asimov was the first person to think of the idea of a Robot and he was the first one to even ever use the word Robot. Before that, sci fi, HAD no robots. There were Golems, such as in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, but that concept had been around for centuries, (but that's a whole different story.) The idea of a sentinet mechanical being was all Asimov's though. There would be no Matrix, no Terminator, no AI, if it weren't for him.

I'm obviously not against the idea of machienes going wild and blowing up everything and everything. Or else I wouldn't be a big fan of the Matrix and T2. But there is much more to robots then just mindless killing and anihilation that is so prevalent in today's sci-fi. I wish people would read the works of Asimov, Heinlein, and Frank Herbert so they could see where their Terminator and Matrix and Star Wars came from and would realize that it didn't all come strait from movie producer's bottom holes.

Sorry for the rant. I have never seen the movie (obviously, since it hasn't came out yet), so I dont know how good it will be. And I agree with Fatpie42 in the fact that I hope it doesn't suck.

If this is all a movie project type thing.. does that mean this is all B.S and that this machine hasn't been created? LOL hoping for a NO!

You're right. It is BS.

You're right. It is BS.

is givning robots net access or datalink to other robots...lol the stupid humans always do it u cant have a mutiny if all robot beings are separate...

quote]I should let you know that Asimov was the first person to think of the idea of a Robot and he was the first one to even ever use the word Robot. Before that, sci fi, HAD no robots.[/quote]

Interesting that you said that. To take your point back one step and perhaps offer some edification on it, I read the following on pg. 46 of Robert J.Sawyers essay Artificial Intelligence, Science Fiction, And the Matrrix in the book Taking the Red Pill, Science, Philosophy and Religion in the Matrix -

"the word robot was coined as a work of science fiction: when the Czech writer Karel Uapek was writing his 1920 play RUR - set in the factory of Rossum's Universal... well, universal what? - he needed a name for mechanical labourers, and so he took the Czech word robota and shortened it to "robot". Robota refers to an obligation to a landlord that can only be repaid by forced physical labour. But Uapek knew well that the real flesh-and-blood robotniks had rebelled against their landlords in 1848. From the very beginning, the relationship between humans and robots was seen as one that might lead to conflict".

Appears to me ( if the source of the quote is correct) as if you are crediting Asimov with his appropriation of a term coined from a fellow writer. Again, assuming the source of information is correct, Asimov born/died 1920-1992 seems to have refined and shaped the term into what we currently understand as a human-given rule for living.

His documents show that he was trying to create an entirely mechanical person and produced some sketches.

Genius does not act in a vacuum.

To be a Genius one must think ahead of their time

You are correct about the Czech writer, and Asimov does credit him for inspiring him, but Robot as we know Robot is Asimov.

Nick, even though Leonardo da Vinci was a genius, he did not write sci-fi. And he had nothing to do with the creation or popularization of the word robot. He did not invent the idea of a "robot" no more than his flying machienes were the ideas of the first "helicopters" or "submarines". Besides, many of his writings and drawings were not discovered again until about 40 years ago so they really didn't have much effect on the world. Many neolithic caves have been found to use what is known as "perspective" but it really didn't become en vouge again until the Renaissance 10,000 years later. The Greeks had mechanical devices that weren't used again until thousands of years later. I guess what I'm trying to say is just because you make an idea doesn't mean that it's going to catch on years from now. Think of how many times you have got an idea and someone else gets it and patents it and makes millions. Sure, you might have thought of the concept but you didn't get the idea out first.