“The Octobot also has its own preservation code. ”
August 29, 2016 6:41 AM   Subscribe

Meet Octobot: Squishy, Adorable and Revolutionary [The New York Times] “This squishy eight-armed machine is the world’s first fully autonomous soft-bodied robot. Researchers at Harvard University created the octopus by three-dimensional printing, using silicone gel, which gives it its flexible, rubbery texture. On Wednesday, they unveiled their adorable step toward the robot uprising in the journal Nature [.PDF]. The scientists said in their paper that their creation could be a foundation for the future of soft-bodied robots.”
posted by Fizz (30 comments total) 13 users marked this as a favorite
 
They call it the first fully autonomous soft-bodied robot, but I prefer to think of it as the first pneumatically self-propelled Wacky Wall Walker.
posted by Strange Interlude at 6:50 AM on August 29, 2016 [24 favorites]


Well put. It has no sensors and no AI. Its more like a clockwork toy, but implemented with silicone and chemicals. Still I suppose it demonstrates some sort of landmark.
posted by memebake at 6:53 AM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


Well heck. If this thing can slowly wave its arms and fart on the cheap, my job may not be safe after all.
posted by Western Infidels at 7:05 AM on August 29, 2016 [51 favorites]


First, we add googly eyes. Then, we have it mate with a Paro. Then, its offspring will take over the world.
posted by giraffe at 7:14 AM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


I've just started playing around with arduinos. This weekend I was thinking about how I could make a soft cat toy that the kitties could kick around and not like... tear apart to discover metal objects. Somehow it didn't occur to me that I was imagining something really difficult that sort of did not exist yet.

This is awesome, and I thank Science for its quick turnaround in granting my request.
posted by lownote at 7:24 AM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


Well put. It has no sensors and no AI.

well, an actual octopus has no sensors or AI.

the "micro-fluid logic" seems like a simple control circuit, which is to say that it is both an "AI" and "sensors" (in this case just pressure differentials it looks like) as it has to automatically adjust and coordinate the supply of fuel to the various appendages.

i mean, you could implement a full Von Neumann machine using "fluidic logic" if you wanted to...
posted by ennui.bz at 7:42 AM on August 29, 2016


well, an actual octopus has no sensors or AI.

Er, OK if you're splitting hairs it doesn't. It has much better things: senses and .. er ... 'real I' I suppose.

The 3D printed fluid circuit on this thing is interesting but its just a tick/tock timer as far as I can see. It doesn't react to anything. Hence, this thing is a clockwork, not a robot. It dances on the spot.

The real news is the fabrication technique and chemical motor. But its being reported everywhere as an amazing robot so I think these "Researchers at Harvard University" must have rung up all their "buddies in the media who used to go to Harvard University" to ask them to hype this thing up. Like, that NYT article calls it 'adorable'. Twice.
posted by memebake at 7:51 AM on August 29, 2016 [6 favorites]


This should have been my post.
posted by octothorpe at 7:56 AM on August 29, 2016 [20 favorites]


well, an actual octopus has no sensors or AI.

Not sure what you mean, octopi have pretty complex nervous systems for invertebrates, which counts as sensors and intelligence in my book.

In any case, the question is whether or not it counts as a true autonomous robot, as opposed to something that simply stores kinetic or chemical energy and then expels it mechanically. The term "robot" implies some level of machine intelligence and interactivity/agency within its environment, which the Octobot doesn't really have. It's a very exotic windup toy, but it won't be a robot until it can be remotely controlled or move on its own.
posted by Strange Interlude at 8:02 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


so I think these "Researchers at Harvard University" must have rung up all their "buddies in the media who used to go to Harvard University" to ask them to hype this thing up

You're right, the media are usually so careful about cute science stories, particularly w/r/t terminology.
posted by No-sword at 8:03 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


The term "robot" implies some level of machine intelligence and interactivity/agency within its environment, which the Octobot doesn't really have. It's a very exotic windup toy, but it won't be a robot until it can be remotely controlled or move on its own.

Pff, that's definition-based thinking. This artificial octopus fits the prototypical definition of a robot, i.e. something that waves limbs around and looks cool, more or less perfectly.
posted by No-sword at 8:08 AM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


I, for one, welcome our new miniature silicone overlords.
posted by ZeusHumms at 8:17 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


In any case, the question is whether or not it counts as a true autonomous robot, as opposed to something that simply stores kinetic or chemical energy and then expels it mechanically.

"true" autonomy is basically meaningless. the sort of "AI" that people talk about are all just "control problems" of one sort or another, that just happen to be solved algorithms run on von neumann machines. if you stuffed this robot with a CPU or some microcontrollers and wires running to electric motors in the tentacles, would it count as a robot or a "clock-work toy". if you can solve the same control problem using an analog electrical circuit? if that analog circuit is implemented with fluid hydrogenperoxide?

it's the problem with modern AI research that it's devolved to solving control problems on increasingly fast and small microcomputers. the smartest self-driving car is no more "truly" autonomous than this octopus or a carburetor, for that matter.
posted by ennui.bz at 8:24 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


This is a prerequisite step to making sex bots.
posted by bukvich at 8:38 AM on August 29, 2016


I, for one, welcome our new miniature silicone overlords.

Don't need to worry until it insists on being called Dr. Octobot.
posted by Kabanos at 8:40 AM on August 29, 2016 [4 favorites]


This is a prerequisite step to making sex bots.

Don't need to worry until it insists on being called Dr. Octobot.
posted by Kabanos at 8:41 AM on August 29, 2016 [5 favorites]


ennui.bz: this thing has no inputs. Thats my issue. If its a robot then so is this.
posted by memebake at 8:51 AM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


"true" autonomy is basically meaningless. the sort of "AI" that people talk about are all just "control problems" of one sort or another, that just happen to be solved algorithms run on von neumann machines. if you stuffed this robot with a CPU or some microcontrollers and wires running to electric motors in the tentacles, would it count as a robot or a "clock-work toy". if you can solve the same control problem using an analog electrical circuit? if that analog circuit is implemented with fluid hydrogenperoxide?

it's the problem with modern AI research that it's devolved to solving control problems on increasingly fast and small microcomputers. the smartest self-driving car is no more "truly" autonomous than this octopus or a carburetor, for that matter.


This strikes me as unnecessarily pedantic. A self-driving car is an interesting display of "autonomy" because the control problem it solves is complex and general relative to previous efforts. It would be just as impressive if it was implemented in analog circuits filled with H2O2 (or in literal clockwork). In fact, it would be quite a bit more impressive, but also quixotic, for the same reason -- digital computer control programs are much easier to design and fabricate, because of their compact size and general-purpose architectures.

The significance of saying the Octobot has no sensors or AI is, I think, that it has no substantial sensors or AI. It's not just that it is solving a "control problem" and no more. Any behavior, no matter how intelligent, can be characterized as a control problem.* Rather: the control problem it's solving is trivial. Its behavior is not "intelligent" in interesting ways.

Octobot still seems to be some kind of engineering milestone. But the "robot" billing prompts people to expect some intelligence, and it doesn't seem to have much of any.

(Analog computing is not necessarily worse for all problems, duh. If inflating the legs with gas could make Octobot walk, which it can't, maybe that would save some tricky math figuring out where to put the legs of a digital robot with motors. But purpose-built gas channels are probably harder to design and debug etc. than computer programs ... which is probably why this is a breakthrough rather than old news.)

-----
*Naturally if you don't think "[a]ny behavior, no matter how intelligent, can be characterized as a control problem," you are off the AI train. But this is a very basic disagreement!
posted by grobstein at 9:00 AM on August 29, 2016


I say the people who don't dance without input until they completely run out of energy are the real robots
posted by prize bull octorok at 9:17 AM on August 29, 2016 [8 favorites]


it's the problem with modern AI research that it's devolved to solving control problems on increasingly fast and small microcomputers.

Totally correct that "autonomous" is a clickbatish tool of science reporting and incredibly inaccurate. But take another look at Minsky's "Society of Mind". I'm not sure of what favor the idea is in current "AI" theory but it made a strong case that all "intelligence" may be just that, small simple processes that can do on thing and cooperate between many other simple "devices".

Ten years ago there was doubt that automatic language translation would arrive within centuries if ever, and now google translate does a pretty good job. "Real AI" will arrive surreptitiously with many saying "that's just a fast processor not REAL intelligence" , but the self-driving cars seem pretty smart.
posted by sammyo at 9:47 AM on August 29, 2016


this thing has no inputs. Thats my issue. If its a robot then so is this.

the inputs are the pressure differentials to the appendages. it's not clear but I think the "microfluidic logic" had a control loop which distributes vapor or fuel to the appendages and/or exhaust.

Naturally if you don't think "[a]ny behavior, no matter how intelligent, can be characterized as a control problem," you are off the AI train. But this is a very basic disagreement!

that's my point. if you define AI to be solving control problems, then equating "intelligent" with "interesting" is just splitting hairs...
posted by ennui.bz at 9:53 AM on August 29, 2016


I've read a lot of SF so I know that this will turn out just fine with no unanticipated consequences.


.
.
.


In other news, I encourage you to not work so hard, spend more time with your family, and take that big vacation you've been putting off.
posted by LastOfHisKind at 10:01 AM on August 29, 2016 [2 favorites]


I say the people who don't dance without input until they completely run out of energy are the real robots
posted by prize bull octorok


Hmm.
posted by No-sword at 10:19 AM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Don't need to worry until it insists on being called Dr. Octobot.

the octobotocologist
posted by poffin boffin at 11:03 AM on August 29, 2016 [3 favorites]


I, for one, welcome our new miniature silicone overlords.

miniature farting silicone octopod overlords. I was hoping it was overclockable to like, terrifying whipping bits.
posted by Ogre Lawless at 12:36 PM on August 29, 2016


Soft Bodied Robots??
Rudy Rucker call your lawyer!
posted by djrock3k at 1:29 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


I'm astonished that we're not discussing the farting aspect.
posted by blnkfrnk at 2:39 PM on August 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


This is a prerequisite step to making sex bots.

I'm not saying the engineering problems are insurmountable, but I would not volunteer to beta test the first hydrogen peroxide fueled sexbot.
posted by ryanrs at 3:25 AM on August 30, 2016 [2 favorites]


at the start of this thread I wanted to be squishy, adorable, and revolutionary, like the octobot, but now I'd rather be thought of as something more like a hydrogen peroxide fueled sexbot.
posted by You Can't Tip a Buick at 4:11 AM on August 30, 2016


I would not volunteer to beta test the first hydrogen peroxide fueled sexbot.

Hey, that's no way to talk about [$FOXNEWSANCHORNAME]
posted by Strange Interlude at 11:06 AM on August 30, 2016


« Older Heavily-Delayed Horrors Beyond Human Reckoning   |   There’s only one way for us to win this / Provoke... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments