[Robotgroup] Local kids and robots

[Glenn]

Betty,

Anthropology is most relevant to robotics, particularly humanoid ones.

Perhaps you could do some anthropology at the RG meetings, and provide
some insight into the dynamics of the interaction, and causal  
mechanisms at at play/work.

(If we can get this worked out, maybe I can send a robot clone to the 
day job in my stead,
 and make it to more of the RG meetings ;-) I miss them in several ways!)

Glad to see you on the RG mailing list.  Hope you find things of 
interest to you and your son.
I am at home staying out of the way of , those learning to ice skate, in 
their vehicles.

-Glenn

--

Submitted for your consideration on a cold winter evening:

Anthropology can be defined as the study of humanity

Physical Anthropology = The study of Human Hardware
Cultural Anthropology = The study of Human Software
Archeology = The study of  used Human Parts and related artifacts

Physical Robotics = The study of robot hardware
Cultural Robotics = The study of robot software
Robot Anthropology = Dumpster Diving

A model (plan?) is most helpful, when trying to build something like a 
robot.
The model may take many forms.  A sufficiently sophisticate model, 
including both high
level concepts and low level details, provides a comprehensive framework 
in which to discuss
the many things, that could be considered  a robot. (How many commas are 
allowed ,before
being considered, a run-on sentence?)

(If you have no plan, the journey is the goal.  At least that is what  
you tell the philosophical twits,
 your boss, your creditors, and anyone else that fails to see the value 
and relevance of your
 "research". )

Even simple robots have traits that could be compared to
to those of humans, and therefore humanoid models can be instructive, 
for robots that are
not humanoid.  Sophisticated robots, are built out of collection of 
simpler robots,
(subsystems), working in concert.

Keep in mind,
that a human-centric model may not be "optimum" for all situations.
In fact it is not optimum, except for those environments appropriate for
human habitation.
It useful to be aware of the pervasive bias for measuring robot capabilities
in human-centric terms. Consider who is doing the judging. 
There are many other models.

AI researcher Marvin Minsky has said that he is no more interested in 
pondering if robots can "think",
than if submarines can "swim" - a way of pointing out the common bias 
towards measuring
robot accomplishments, in terms of how humans might accomplish a similar 
task.

A wasp autonomously flies, finds finds it own fuel,  and reproduces.  A 
helicopter flies, can be used to
find food, but I am not aware of one that can reproduce itself.  Also, I 
know of  no
helicopter than can regularly and safely land, up-side-down. Some would
say a wasp and a  helicopter are products of different designers with 
different goals,
but both are said to "fly".
Consider your goals, your definition of optimum ,and chose an 
appropriate model
for your research.

Humans are not perfect, why should we seek to make exact copies of 
ourselves?
How about modeling the best of what we are.  That is what Isaac Asimov 
did with the most
sophisticated robots he invented in his science fiction stories.

Asimov offered this definition of a robot:
robot = computer + machine

I find this a useful definition.  It is concise, but not limiting.
The "computer" and "machine" may be mechanical, biological, or electronic,
or positronic, as in his stories - and still fit the definition.
The clever Dr. Asimov offered a concise definition
while planting the seed for discussion, debate and experimentation that 
continues
beyond his passing.

--

Enough of this, I must get back to washing socks for tomorrow, and I 
don't want
to get side tracked  building a waterproof keyboard, so I could type at 
the same time.

Why ask rhetorical questions?

Now that is something I can ponder, even while washing socks. ;-)

This sentence, no verb.

Cheers,

-Glenn


Betty wrote:
> Hi,
>
>  
>
> This is Betty Dingus. I've attended two meetings now, plus a Dorkbot. I
> uploaded an article about the One Laptop Per Child program a few weeks ago.
> I homeschool my eleven-year-old son, Eric, and we both joined the Robot
> Group last week (although Eric wasn't physically there). We'd heard of the
> group years ago from Bob Comer, our neighbor. I signed up for the Meetup
> group, also.
>
>  
>
> I'm interested in robotics and teaching it to kids, although I'm neither
> technical nor an artist (my degree being in Anthropology). Locally, there
> are summer camps (such as the pricey IDtech , as recently discussed) and a
> tiny program at the Children's Museum. Most of the ongoing action is in
> contest teams, though. So here's the scoop about what Austin kids are
> involved in (at least, that I know about):
>
>  
>