Originally published at: https://boingboing.net/2018/05/21/in-the-future-demolition-robo.html
…
2 Likes
queue the right wing “robots are taking away american jobs in demolition” in 3…2…1…
2 Likes
I can’t tell whether you are applauding the right wing for speaking truth or claiming that there are infinite unskilled labor jobs available so robots can’t take them all. 
2 Likes
maybe both. 
I am a multi-talented individual.
1 Like
Old school manual method.
Hands-on, it does require a skilled operator and a $200K Volvo Excavator with a hydraulic “thumb”.
I get a lot of kicks watching this guy work with his tools…
From the video…“That -was- the bathroom…” “Here comes the second Tornado…”
5 Likes
Pretty sure there’s already a lot of Right Wing robots out there wrecking stuff, they just ain’t shiny and metallic.
8 Likes
oh they definitely are not robots!!!
3 Likes
I reckon those “Lizard People” are just folk a little more in tune with their inner reptilian brain stem, not literally lizards.
Still assholes, mind.
3 Likes
6 Likes
Judging by the guy standing beside it operating a huge remote control this appears to be a Remote Controlled Vehicle, not a robot.
8 Likes
People have called remote control devices robot so often that it’s now considered correct usage.
What makes this different from a machine you sit in to control? You know, like a tractor or a backhoe? A cord to the controls?
4 Likes
Surely there is little difference between the controls being in a cab attached to the tools (as in ‘the old school manual method’) and the controls being wirelessly held by an operator who is not in a cab (as in the video posted by pesco). If the latter is a robot so is the former. I saw no pre-programmed automation, merely a human directly controlling a tool, in both cases.
1 Like
Mark Pauline’s not entirely wrong, but I think innovative machines get a bad rap. An awful lot of the coverage is “Look at Boston Dynamics’ new Robot Overlord as it does stuff that’s sort of threatening” (though, to be fair, they play that up), or “OMG, robots are gonna put us all out of work and kill us 'n stuff.”
I design and build equipment that’s being used to create novel anti-microbial materials, and super-hydrophobic surfaces that reduce industrial water consumption, and lots of other amazing, useful things.
At the other end of the spectrum, a friend of mine from high school designs and builds musical robots whose only purpose is to make the world more interesting. You can see his work here: http://andycavatorta.com/
IDK, Skynet may be coming, but along the way, we can enjoy the Gravity Harps.
2 Likes
I agree that it’s not so different as to make it properly a robot, as opposed to a remotely controlled track demolition machine. It is a nice innovation in that it will keep people away from the danger of falling debris, tipping over of the machine, and various nasty particulates that get into the air when stuff is demolished.
1 Like
I had not thought about that, and you are correct. It’s not a robot, just a hazmat type of tool that places the operator far away safely and out of harms way. That being said, I feel it’s the journalists failure that the article leads you to believe that the machine in question is a “fire and forget” type of tool. Hell, even the Mars landers have to call home occasionally, and that right there makes them a “remote” despite them being, oh, say a billion miles apart.
2 Likes
You’ll never take me alive, Husqvarna!
2 Likes
Never mind the “robot”. Those humans move at twice normal speed!
5 Likes
The difference is that you can send the remote controlled demolisher into places that are too risky to drive a piloted machine into.
I think the distinction is, that a machine without a physically present pilot/driver looks like a robot, even if technically it’s not autonomous. So remote controlled things are coming to be called robots becase they look robotic even if they aren’t.
2 Likes
They even have YOU convinced!
3 Likes
