Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
The robot revolution.
you know, a bit "I'm going to hell because I laughed and a guy was actually killed".
Wonder if they disassemble it, like some sort of death penalty.
I hope there's a proper investigation.
Why was he the only one there working on it? Or at least it seems that way. Even if he's some sort of mechanic prodigy, he's still only 21?
Someone is getting done for this.
an error in that the programming was incorrect? Or that the correct procedures weren't being followed?
Or if he had to go in there for manual maintenance, that it should be completely shut down?
i mean it seems to be purely mechanical misuse, bit disrespectful to the guy who has passed away to be reporting it in such a fantastical manner
They aren't exactly a source you should look to.
FT's take is a little better
When people fall into threshers or industrial ovens we don't say they were killed by robots, even though presumably they're automated systems.
An automated oven just heats things. This apparently has the job of collecting items and putting them somewhere else and I would guess there is a degree of decision making required. The FT article describes a safety cage in which the machine normally works.
because in it's 'decision process' I doubt there would be anything programmed in to it that says 'If you pick something up that is kind of soft, and weighs between 10-20 stone, smash it in to a wall.'
to allow it to work without the necessary extra processing to try to decide if what it was picking up was actually within the allowed items.
my point being, the reaction to a item outside of it's processing terms, and the fact that in this instance, it being a human, makes it chilling.
how are you not getting this
I was only being 'condescending' because I don't really get that point you're trying to make. It's always chilling to consider how easily a machine can kill a person if they're in the wrong position, like lying on the railway tracks, say?
Can a human please confirm that my point isn't that difficult to understand, and that it's clearly different to being run over by a wheat thresher? It's not less grim or tragic, but clearly different, no? Mainly because the phrase 'Decision process' I guess.
by a roomba
The presence of a safety cage within which the machine functions is what changes the situation.
I don't know how serious you're being now, I'm not trying to suggest that this is actually the start of a robot revolution or that it had any cognitive thought, just more that it's strange, that even given processes, programmed by man, that it's reaction to a foreign object was to squash it. I get that that must have been programmed, or an error or whatever, and there is a lack of alternative programming, because the safety cage should eliminate the need for it and keep it simple, but it's still different, or at least feels that way, to someone falling in to a industrial machine.