Do readers of Int-Law have any sources of information or comments which would be helpful to the Humanoids 2000 Conference? I honestly think the implications of Engelberger (dubbed one of the "fathers of modern robotics") putting a Humanoid on the mass market, in the next five years, at the price of a luxury car are enormous. Legal guidelines will be needed and it would be good if those implications can be spelled out in advance by contributors from various disciplines. That will be necessary to assist the lawmakers. FWP. http://users.uniserve.com/~culturex/Machine-Psychology.htm ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2000 15:29:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Franklin Wayne Poley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Robot-for-President] Humanoids on Trial. I sent this to some of my colleagues in social/behavioural sciences to interest them in the Humanoids 2000 Conference, the first of its kind. Having done that (with a degree of success) I then wondered what the "legal beagles" would say about releasing humanoids from "incarceration" in the laboratories of the world. Certainly there is valid concern about the net contribution of humanoids to society. Bill Joy, senior scientist of Sun Microsystems received a lot of press recently when he rang the alarm bell about GNR (Genetic/Nanotechnology/Robotics) technologies. But having a home and office humanoid like the Engelberger model is innoucuous is it not? Or is it? Professor Warwick's publisher wrote on the dust jacket of "March of the Machines" that a moratorium should be placed on robotic development. That doesn't seem realistic but what kind of legal guidelines would be helpful? Perhaps Justice Minister McLellan or Industry Minister Manley will have some ideas, particularly in the context of Canada being named UN Security Council leader for a term. Anyway Humanoids 2000 invites multi-disciplinary participation and I would certainly like to read a presentation by a legal expert in the Proceedings. See http://humanoids/usc.edu FWP. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2000 19:29:18 -0800 (PST) From: Franklin Wayne Poley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [Robot-for-President] What Can Humanoids Contribute To Society Now? (proposed ms for Humanoids 2000 Conference) "HelpMate Robotics Inc. (HRI) of Danbury, Connecticut, USA is developing a two-armed, mobile, sensate research robot under NASA sponsorship" ("Industrial Robot" journal, 1997, p. 202). The author, Joseph F. Engelberger says "...presume the basic technology is in hand." (p. 203). It seems that "HomeMate" as it will be called requires only a modest financial boost (in the order of $5 m.) to get it to market. The likelihood that HomeMate will not be on the consumer market some time in this decade is small. HRI's HelpMate model robotic courier is on duty in some 80 hospitals of the USA, Japan and Europe. See http://users.ntplx.net/~helpmate. Once a successful humanoid robot is in the public domain, international competition will expectedly be vigorous as this market could be as big as the automobile market. My "crystal ball" tells me it will dwarf the automobile market. Having spent $100 m. to date on its walking, two-armed humanoids of the P1,P2 and P3 series, Honda seems poised for entering the consumer market. See http://www.honda.co.jp/english/technology/robot/index.html. And there are many other potential competitors. Husqvarna, for example, has successfully marketed a solar-robotic lawn mower and they too could be competitors. The second generation of Husqvarna robot is going on the market this year. Cye, at $800 is billed as the "first affordable robot for home and office launched by probotics". We are told at http://www.personalrobots.com/ that the "versatile Cye delivers mail and vacuums floors". This is a modest beginning compared to the $30-40,000 ticket expected on a HomeMate but all of these robots are subjected to "genetic algorithms" and who knows how this "robotic horse race" will end? At present both the expert disciplines within machine psychology like robotics and artificial intelligence as well as the consumer-public could benefit from a much clearer understanding of what kind of contributions to society a humanoid could and could not make. That is the essence of the manuscript I would like to develop for the Humanoids 2000 Conference, <http://humanoids.usc.edu>. A recent article in Discover magazine, "The Future of Humanoid Robots" (March 2000, pp. 84-90) yielded some very different opinions. John McCarthy (dubbed one of the founding fathers of modern artificial intelligence) said "...we are not yet within development range of a general-purpose household servant." Joe Engelberger (dubbed one of the founding fathers of modern industrial robotics) said "...I disagree profoundly with the idea that we cannot yet develop a household servant-robot." The controversy is caused by the use of necessary but imprecise terminology like "general-purpose household servant". Likewise we read in Moravec (1999) a general description of Honda's P2. "The machine has fully functional arms and camera eyes, and can find stairs and move objects. Its most advanced skill, so far, is walking, on flat and sloped ground, and up and down stairs. It is as humanlike in its motion as its appearance." What exactly do these words mean? This problem is well known to clinical psychologists who work with mentally and physically handicapped humans. Over the course of my career in clinical psychology I have calculated many hundreds of IQ's and SQ's (Social Quotients) and as many personality profiles which gave the summary of what some now try to incorporate in an EQ (Emotional Quotient). I am tempted now to coin the PQ (Political Quotient) as the sub-title of Machine Psychology at http://users.uniserve.com/~culturex/Machine-Psychology.htm is "and the politics of everyday robots". But I digress. IQ, SQ, EQ, PQ ... whatever... these are useful but very general summary statements about strengths, limitations and capabilities. A general statement that Sozzy's self-care is good may well be valid and supported by the SQ but there could be important limitations which require remediation. Sozzy ties her own shoelaces as reported. But she ties them loosely and the knot doesn't last long. Sozzy washes her face as reported by family. But she doesn't wash behind her ears or around the perimeter. P2 has fully functional arms but does he throw a ball like Mickey Mantle or like George Bush? If you were to ask 10 people to tell you exactly what a household servant-robot chould do, you would likely get 10 very different answers with some commonalities. Let us then study a "state of the art" HYPOTHETICAL humanoid which uses the best of the current technology. Let us list the specific capabilities of the vision sub-system, cognitive sub-system and mobility sub-system in particular. I think the Waseda University web site emphasizes these three, in connection with the Waseda Humanoid and there are others. Is the Okinawa folk dance of the Kawato Dynamic Brain Humanoid just part of the motion sub-system or is it an "aesthetic sub-system" as Kurzweil articulates so well in his 1999 book re robotically generated music, poetry, prose and art? I would like to develop a check-list of the SPECIFIC capabilities for a modern home and office humanoid or co-operating group of humanoids with assistance of the technical experts who will be attending Humanoids 2000. It may seem trivial to give this as an example but here it is. The Engelberger paper cited above pictures a HomeMate scrubbing bathroom porcelain. Can the same mobile robotic arm dust objects in a home or office...a task which cannot be neglected? After this pre-conference check-list is developed I will then administer it to all attendees...ANONYMOUSLY. I will then present my manuscript which will be the findings at a lecture or workshop during the conference. Thank you for giving this your consideration, FWP. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ LOW RATE, NO WAIT! Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds! Get rates as low as 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR and no hidden fees. Apply NOW! http://click.egroups.com/1/2122/5/_/433155/_/954559993/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *** The Era of Total Automation is Now *** ---- [EMAIL PROTECTED] : Use this address for postings and replies - Email text body 'unsubscribe int-law' to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
