Now this is what innovation is all about. It's good see stuff like this happen - a shame it has to happen in the first place though. I personally believe that for all of life's problems, "Technology shall provide" so this is cool.
Unhealthy Boy Uses Robotic Avatar to Attend School
- Thread starter Tom Goldman
- Start date
They probably use the elevator, even my crappy high school has one.J03bot said:
But this is truly amazing! Finally we're making some progress in the public sector!
Life without an immune system isn't either. Nor is life without any interaction aside from your family.murphy7801 said:
I hate those guys!DaHero said:
Well I mean...I hate to be...okay let's face it I LOVE being blunt and honest...but it will sadly happen.katsumoto03 said:Life without an immune system isn't either. Nor is life without any interaction aside from your family.murphy7801 said:
I hate those guys!DaHero said:
Ah, how I've fantasized about this being the norm.
And not it is. For him.
Damn.
On a serious note: awesome, good for him =)
And not it is. For him.
Damn.
On a serious note: awesome, good for him =)
Actually the idea has been around since the 1980s and possibly even longer. This exact kind of proxy was used in the "Max Headroom" franchise, where you'd even see people having "meetings" by arranging remote controlled TV/Video Camera combos in circles and the like. The technology was actually present at the time, and you even saw it used in detective fiction and the like (even The Hardy Boys had a video camera attached to a remote controlled plane as a piece of their standard equipment), the biggest obstacle and what made the 'Max Head room' idea slightly futuristic (20 minutes into the future!) was the lack of being able to get adequete control range, however with today's wireless networks and such that's no longer an issue and the possibilities for remote control are pretty substantial.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Headroom_(TV_series)
Of course there are a lot of issues with this on a large scale, truthfully I don't think the problems are social, as people who are hermits or disabled to begin with have been getting by without (or minimal) direct human contact pretty much forever. The problems of course are going to be things like having these machines rolling down sidewalks or in public places, not to mention delivery issues since someone who doesn't want to leave their home is going to have to guide the thing onto public transit and the like. What's more remote handling isn't very precise, if one of these things hits a person on a sidewalk and is damaged, who is liable? Likewise if one happens to do damage to something in a store, how much liability is the person controlling it going to suffer? Consider also that if the person is disabled they might not be able to pay for any damage their machine causes (pehaps only having gotten one with medical or state assistance).
It's like the Segways which are outright banned in a lot of places (though legal in others), but more extreme. Truthfully people have been tossing out stuff like this that seems like it could change the world for a long time, but it rarely does because of the consideration. Kids don't have their motorboards, there are no household gyrocopters (despite instructions on how to make one in magazines like Popular Mechanics), and while there is still some intertia behind the "Robo-Trucks" project that isn't going anywhere soon (the idea here being to make large trucks which would be used to transport goods, run by programmed computers and guided by satellite systems. I remember reading that it was tested on a limited scale, but a combination of concern over accidents, and the number of people in the transport business it could put out of work... the Teamsters are a ridiculously powerful union... both legitamatly and otherwise).
Cool news, I'm happy for the kid, but I don't think it will be implemented on a large scale. Truthfully the problem with a lot of technologies is simply developing the infrastructure to support them. A lot of ideas fail because the world just isn't set up to make them practical, and people resist sudden, radical change. Kind of sad in a way, but I'll be surprised if this beats the odds and goes into more regular use.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Headroom_(TV_series)
Of course there are a lot of issues with this on a large scale, truthfully I don't think the problems are social, as people who are hermits or disabled to begin with have been getting by without (or minimal) direct human contact pretty much forever. The problems of course are going to be things like having these machines rolling down sidewalks or in public places, not to mention delivery issues since someone who doesn't want to leave their home is going to have to guide the thing onto public transit and the like. What's more remote handling isn't very precise, if one of these things hits a person on a sidewalk and is damaged, who is liable? Likewise if one happens to do damage to something in a store, how much liability is the person controlling it going to suffer? Consider also that if the person is disabled they might not be able to pay for any damage their machine causes (pehaps only having gotten one with medical or state assistance).
It's like the Segways which are outright banned in a lot of places (though legal in others), but more extreme. Truthfully people have been tossing out stuff like this that seems like it could change the world for a long time, but it rarely does because of the consideration. Kids don't have their motorboards, there are no household gyrocopters (despite instructions on how to make one in magazines like Popular Mechanics), and while there is still some intertia behind the "Robo-Trucks" project that isn't going anywhere soon (the idea here being to make large trucks which would be used to transport goods, run by programmed computers and guided by satellite systems. I remember reading that it was tested on a limited scale, but a combination of concern over accidents, and the number of people in the transport business it could put out of work... the Teamsters are a ridiculously powerful union... both legitamatly and otherwise).
Cool news, I'm happy for the kid, but I don't think it will be implemented on a large scale. Truthfully the problem with a lot of technologies is simply developing the infrastructure to support them. A lot of ideas fail because the world just isn't set up to make them practical, and people resist sudden, radical change. Kind of sad in a way, but I'll be surprised if this beats the odds and goes into more regular use.
WanderingFool said:
The immaturity of a lot of people on these boards, of a lot of otherwise bright people in general is that they see the two as conflicting or competing belief systems. People of faith aren't all imprisoning Galileo or pushing evolution out of schools. Plenty of people have been religious and great scientists from Albert Einstein to Gregor Mendel and Francis Bacon. If you really believe the two can not coexist together, that there is no room for both, then you have made science your religion and while you're playing defender of the faith you've left the realm of reason behind you. I don't know why any scientific topic at all invites religious ridicule from some people. Was there some foot note about the boy being cautioned by a priest that the robot was sent by the devil that I didn't see there? Did some tribal shaman offer to take the boy on a "spirit journey" to school instead? I must have missed that. So why the scoreboard? Such is your zeal as inquisitors I suppose, that your evangelical crusade never ends. Do you really think that your perception that there is a war or competition going on is healthy? Why make this about that? What is it about you that needs to do that? Meanwhile ironically, while practicing your own prejudices you consider yourselves to be evolved individuals. I suppose that hypocrisy and self-righteousness are indispensable elements of human nature. But what's the point in being evolved individuals if you can't rub other people's noses in it, am I right?Funkysandwich said:
In any event I'm not really comfortable telling zealots on either end of the spectrum that they need to stop and think. They usually get all shouty on you. This is a basic appeal to reason. You don't need to take shit, but how about not handing it out either? Is that too much to ask? Or is a little basic human tolerance and respect beyond the enlightened men of science?
As for my originally intended comment *ahem*:
What this kid needs is a Quarian style suit.