Robotics

Lately I found myself following closely to the newest and latest development in the field of robotics. I acquired the latest article in Popular Science while waiting for my flight to Seattle. Quite frankly, the development of robotics is beginning to get disturbing.

Anyone who are remotely interested in science fiction and have watched a few episodes of Twilight zone or Issac Asimov's Science Fiction Magazine have probably seen stories about the origin of mankind. The basic premise goes something like this:

Humans went to a different planet/aliens visited our planets/we travelled back in time to prehistoric earth and tweaked with the genetics of local organisms/taught them how to use their opposible thumbs/tools/start fire and wah lah, we have our humans today. There are many versions but the underlying idea was the same: "devine intervention" wasn't really from the devine, it's from somebody just like us.

So do you see where I am going with this? The Bible says, "God created men in his own image." And us human beings, at least those in the robotics field, have an unexplainable obssession to create humanoid robots. Forget about a ball or wheels for locomotion, after millions of years of evolution, we already know that bipedalism is the way to go -- for obvious reasons, we don't have to clear a track or path for the robots (or ideally, for them to clear a path for themselves), bipeds can simple choose to walk around the objects, walk over the objects, or just jump over it. Did you know there are "purist" not only in religions but also in robotics?? They believe that robots should not possess abilities above and beyond that of humans, i.e. no lasers to assist them in gaging distances between them and an object, they should simply use binocular vision like us. What do we have here, robotic fanatics? O.o

Back to bipedalism. A bipedal robot has already been created, but it simply consumes too much energy and the battery lasts for about half an hour, not the best way to go. Next alternative, actuators that imitate muscles, positioning like muscles. When you only contract those muscles that's necessary for the motion, the rest aren't consuming any energy at all.

So do you see where I am going now? When technology permits, and technology has been improving in leaps and bounds in the last couple decades, why not replace actuators with real human muscles, perhaps developed from stem cells obtained in a moral way. Next, the wires would be replaced with nerves, and tubes that carry fuels can be replaced with blood vessels. Why not go all organics? And next thing you know, God has created men in his own image.

What is the purpose of creating these humanoid robots? Gill Pratt, the inventor of the actuators, said because he wanted a robot maid (sexist? or shall we cut him the slack that his desire was inspired by sci fi back from the male-centered era?). Sure I want a robot maid (let's just go with the flow here), but let's just stick with that. I'd like my robot to be no different than a vacuum cleaner, or better yet, a PC, which allows me to download the newest and latest programs. If a part broke, I replace it. If the robot broke, I replace it. There's not guilt in leaving my PC on 24/7 if I so choose.

But we are humans, will we ever settle for glorified humanoid vacuum cleaner/butler/chef? No. There are always those who'd want to temper with "analytical ability." After all, wouldn't it be better if your machine can learn progressively from his/her newest experience and assimilate information and, better yet, formulate his/her own opinions? Perhaps someone wants more of a companion than a maid!

Now let's be serious here. It's not maids that we are looking for, it's slaves -- we want them to do all the hardwork (household chores and more) for us at close to no cost and preferrably at our beckons. So let's ask ourselves again, do you really want to equip said mechanical slaves with a mind of their own? Perhaps analytical ability cannot equate a hundred percent to a "soul," but since we really don't know what a soul is and how to define one, where do we draw this line? If a machine has a mind of their own, shouldn't they be then given rights? After all, animals have rights. Just ask any of your local animal activists chapter. Now if we are talking about machines that have cognitive ability higher than that of your pets, don't they deserve to have rights?

Even if we drop that whole civil discussion for the time being. Once the machine can think for themselves, how long is it going to be before we hear, "why do I have to work here days and nights for little or no returns?" or for those who seeks companion ship, will the machines have preferences for their own partners?

Regardless, these wild speculations of mind are still pretty down the line. Or, are they just around the corner, but we just don't know yet? It doesn't matter. We can't stop progress, right or wrong, good or bad. The evitable is doomed to come. Perhaps there are fate afterall, perhaps the universe (a.k.a. God) does have it's own plans, and we are just humanoid dummies following scripts in this gigantic book that we have never seen.