Scary robot lumberjack makes deforestation too easy

boing
21

5 Likes
22

If I remember correctly they were introduced in the 1970s and in Scandinavia since the 1980s widely in use (btw, not because it makes deforestation faster. last time I looked Norway was still full of trees)

But Giger designed much more organic-looking $things

Harvester_John_Deere_1170E_Arbeitskopf.JPG2560×1920 1.96 MB

4 Likes
23

And someone, some where, has an unnatural urge to stick their dick into it…

6 Likes
24

There could be several people in a crew in the woods. A operator, a spotter, a foreman etc. It wouldn’t be safe to have a single person operating that kind of machine alone. And not all logging is done on flat land either, so there are different machines to haul stuff up and down hills. (Some trees are hauled away by helicopter.)

Then there are the silviculturists who grow the trees, foresters who manage the forest (what to plant, what to cut),crews who cut the trees, crews who haul the trees, crews at the mills who process the trees, and the chain of lumber products to consumers.

So the local fucknozzle is correct, it does bring jobs. Maybe not thousands jobs, but still jobs with decent pay.

3 Likes
25

Scary - linkbait
robot lumberjack - human operator, the term is “[harvester head][1]”
deforestation depends on the situation
too easy - see Scary
[1]: https://www.google.com/search?q=“harvester+head”#q=“harvester+head”&tbm=vid

14 Likes
26

My favorite is my friendly neighborhood robut banker

6 Likes
27

Modern economics doesn’t work that way.

2 Likes
28

I remember seeing a documentary including these awhile back. They were pretty neat, the operators made good money, were very well trained in how to use the equipment efficiently. Moreover, costs were lowered, as the machines consumed considerably less fuel to operate, they allowed significantly better selective logging, etc.

One of the things nobody has mentioned, is the operator needs to know what sort of trees he’s after/cutting, he punches 'em in as he goes, and the software actually measures, and cuts at specific intervals to maximize use of the tree, and to fulfill the orders on his todo, all in real time. The documentary I watched was touting the fact that with much smaller footprint, selective logging was much more sustainable, considerably less fuel was consumed, the felled byproducts were returned to the ecosystem at the spot of harvest instead of becoming a problem elsewhere, etc.

All in all, this looks like one of the best choices. Lets a portion of the reduced costs and workforce be used for responsible initiatives, replanting, etc.

12 Likes
29

What if it has six legs? Does that make it a mecha-insect?

8 Likes
30

So that’s what the black smoke monster looks like.

4 Likes
31
2 Likes
32

I find these ones more scary:

3 Likes
33

This is cool, but what’s the reason for producing sawdust in the middle of nowhere?

2 Likes
34

Scary? They’re wonderful! Such harvesters are progressive in the moral sense of the term. They make logging safer and quicker and can leave the area and altered ecosystem in better shape than most other vehicular loggers. More selective harvesting and sustainable thinning and so on is good.

They needn’t be used to clearcut but can be. Clearcutting isn’t intrinsically evil anyway; not all human development is bad, and some species can actually be helped by clearcuts since we now fight so many natural wildfires that would otherwise cause complex ecological successions.

10 Likes
35

There is a nice short story by Dean Ing about just such a machine in his 1982 collection “High Tension”.

1 Like
36

Steampunk treehugger makes deforestation too easy

3 Likes
37
38

Isn’t that only a year or two away, he asked innocently?

5 Likes
39

I vote for yes. Now, would it be scarier to find a six or an eight leg
version of that in your back yard?

40

“Easy for you to say”, the robot resonded. “I have to walk back.”