Boston dynamics works on 'under-actuated' locomotion based on research going back to MIT's leg lab Under-actuated basically means that instead of using motor torques to force the limb into a particular position, you also use springs and masses
-
-
-
That makes a ton of sense, thank you
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I guess natural selection as proxy for solving hard problems maybe even unknown unknowns
-
Understanding how existing natural models solve the outlined problems often gives a lot of insight compared to trying to build from first principles.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Some animal-like designs are pretty practical. I worked on a robotic snake that could climb on the inside and outside of pipes, for example. (That project was shared with Boston Dynamics, incidentally.) Dog-like robots can navigate much harder terrain than e.g. a wheeled robot.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It's great marketing
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
A robot the takes human form would be uniquely capable of navigating a human built world.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'd say the backwards knee joints are uncanny enough to give them the benefit of the doubt that they're just being practical.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
yeah that's exactly the point. Their work is all about building mechatronics systems that replicate human and animal bipedal/quadrupedal motion. Practicality isn't the objective. It's more about pushing the field of mechatronic control and dynamics.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
you don’t think thousands of years of evolution have led to configurations that converge toward optimal form and function?
-
It hasn't. They human eye and spine are common examples of non-optimal designs.
-
depends on your definition of optimal, dunnit
-
Also, footnote. I wrote “converge toward...” not “arrive at...”.
-
Optimal configurations in evolution sounds suspiciously like Intelligent Design. The only thing evolution considers as optimal is being able to successfully pass genetic information on to the next generation. And it's *Billions* of years, not thousands.
-
It actually sounds, and should sound, nothing like intelligent design whatever. You’re completely missing the essence of what evolution of any system is all about.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
As has been said - to work with us in our world, to take the place of soldiers where it's easier to add a human shaped droid than choose from many different types.pic.twitter.com/kLEptcCtvK
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
1. Evolution is a great designer, just slow. 2. Humanoid robots can work jobs and navigate in environments designed for humans.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Because we've built the world to our form. When combined with a powerful brain (silicone or wetware), it has proven to be an immensely adaptable and resilient form
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The designs are time-tested to be effective. Why reinvent the wheel?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
1. Knowing how hard it is to imitate the complex process of walking/running/jumping of humans and animals, I think it is very smart on their side to use us as measuring stick for their success. 2. It is also a great publicity. :)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.