Animats for entertainment is a robotic wild animal show that popped up in Bengaluru, India (citation). These robotic animal show includes various types of animats, such as African elephants, moose, Chinese panda, dolphins, and many other animals. Although very similar to other zoos this one has no real animals being held in captivity. The zoo was created with the purpose of creating awareness of the importance of preserving ecology and wild animals. Individuals who visit this zoo are welcomed by animats that are able to move and give off sound to make the experience seem more realistic. Having this new type of zoo can have different affects on people depending on their age and understanding of animats. For instance, children can react differently to animats than they would to real animals. Having interactions with “wild” animats is a different experience because they are robotically operated and are less likely to cause harm as they are not programmed to have animalistic instincts. Unlike real wild animals, the robots can misconstrue the idea that wild animals are not dangerous. Children and others individuals might obtain the perception that they are not dangerous and be faced with a problem when they interact with real wild animals.
Source:http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/bangalore/first-robotic-wild-animal-show/article18392500.ece In the article, Will adults of the future care about nature if robots replace pets when they are kids?. I found the article to be very insightful about the future of robotic animals and how they might play a part in our lives. It is noted that people who did not grow up at the peek of technology might have less of a connection with robotic dogs. Likewise, those who grew up with real dogs or cats are less likely to feel the same connection with a robotic pet. On the other hand, younger kids who have experience interacting with technology are more likely to respond to the robotic dogs. They can actually benefit from having them as their pets. Kids are able to give their robotic friend their very own personalities and due to advancements in artificial intelligence they will eventually be able to mimic and learn from their owners.
Advancements in artificial intelligence will allow robotic pets to learn and might be more impactful and teaching experience for the kids or owners of the robot. Being able to learn from humans will help the robotic animal to better integrate into real world scenarios and places. Technology in pets can help us learn about how kids can potentially benefit from learning about animals and they might be inclined to protect and help the environment. Although, kids can learn from their robotic pets it can also lead them not caring about other animals, creatures, and nature. Real life pets allow children to learn about responsibility. Most of the responsibility is learned from picking up after the pet, taking them for a walk, and feeding them. However, with robotic pets they are not responsible for any of those things which can lead to not care about other’s welfare. Having responsibility of another living thing can help people empathize with another being and nature because one has to commit to taking care of it. Another thing related to issues with robotic pets is that it can lead to the mentality that technology can easily replace nature. Having these thoughts can cause kids to not be committed to nature and real animals and be quick to dismiss problems related to animals and nature. Overall, I think there are pros and cons to robotic pets. Some people can relate the robots to nature and be able to appreciate both, however, others may be think nature and animals can be replaced by technology. The article, Biologists are using robots and technology to battle alien plants and animals made the point about the usage of robots to eliminate animals that are dangerous and or ‘alien’. I think the concept of eliminating this animals and plants is interesting as it can affect the overall ecosystem. From previous knowledge I understand that venomous and alien species can be extremely threatening because they can cause the ecosystem to die if a species does not belong. For instance, the alien animals can be introduced and kill of an entire species that is actually native to the area.
Personally, it seems to me that by introducing robots and technology to these ecosystems we could be causing some serious damage. It’s possible that the technology and robots we are using are not as safe as we might think. They could potentially pollute and even destroy the area in which they are placed. Not only that but it’s possible that the technology and logic behind it is not as accurate as have predicted. What would happen if the robot started ‘accidentally’ killing of native species instead of the alien one? It’s possible that maybe it kills off a fish of the natural species and an alien one, at the end leaves the location without any fish. Expanding on that thought, is it okay for us as creators of technology and robotics to use them and intervene with what could be argued to be natural selection? We are going into a space to eliminate the ‘stronger’ or ‘alien’ species to protect another that is more vulnerable. However, there is a contradictory opinion that I also share. It is generally very rare for ‘alien’ species to make their way to the space of another species. Most of the time these introductions are made via human transportation. I think in this case it is fair for us to go in and remove alien species if we are the ones that introduced them in the first place. If alien plants and animals are not removed from an area in which they do not belong it is allowing them to sequentially kill of a majority or an an entire species all together. Without some intervention we could lose the species completely and eventually lose all but the one alien species. Matthew Braga’s article, Dawn of the Rat-Brained Robots, talks about the development of “living computers” that University of Florida had worked on. A research team at the University has worked to culture rat neurons that can be used for animats. Animats are electronic systems that are controlled by organic materials. They are usually a replication of real-life animals.
Developing rat brains in a laboratory is an interesting topic because we are creating something that happens naturally without having to create it. An ethical question that comes up when creating these artificial brains is if we are over stepping our boundaries by man-making brains. I think that we should not be trying to create something that happens naturally. I think many issues could come from creating something like this. For instance, we could be creating our own form of life and my one day be able to create things that will live around us. I think this will lead to a question of whether we are playing God by creating some form of life. I think that by us experimenting with creating a version of a brain that can think and possibly rational we could be doing that very thing. Although there is the issue of playing God, I think it is a very interesting experiment. I can see how it can be beneficial for medical and testing or experimental reasons. I think that creating cultivated brains can help in the medical field as it could possible help doctors learn and better study the areas of a brain similar to our own. This could help improve the medical field by increasing the knowledge of how our brains function. The creation of artificial brains can also be used to learn and study animals. If the ‘living computer’ brains are used in animats, they can help us better understand real life animals. I think that having animats with a system that can function as if it had a brain can help us work with animats and study how they function and possibly even how they view the world. Likewise, we unfortunately do studies on animals which can be inhumane and harmful for the animals. Having animats with a functioning brain we could prevent having to do tests and experiments on real animals. This could help us prevent from hurting animals. When we think of petting zoos we usually think of soft docile animals that kids and adults alike can get a kick out of seeing up close and interact with. However, Minimaforms, an experimental architecture and design studio has exposed a new type of petting zoo. The article, A Bizarre Petting Zoo Where Robots Replace Animals, shows the way some robots are now being used instead of animals. The robots are a slinky like creation that reacts to human touch and interactions. The actions the people express determines the emotion that the robot will express. The emotions range from playful to anger and boredom.
The robots function using Kinect cameras that observe the guests and processes their gestures and movements. These robots are artificially intelligent driven as the longer they are surrounded and interacting with people, the more they learn. Learning happens with the interaction with humans and the robots develop new emotions as the machine learning they do acts as their memory. The concept and reasoning behind the robotic petting zoo is to learn and see how technology can develop emotions by observing people and their gestures. The company is also interested in seeing how we as humans can interact with robots that react based on our actions. I think these robotic petting zoos are very interesting but they do bring up some ethical questions. I think having people interact with this long robotic looking arms is extremely different than a traditional petting zoo. The interaction that happens with the robots as apposed to real animals is different since animals tend to be composed differently than robots. Animals tend to be warm and have their own way of communication unlike robots which are cold and have only a capacity of acting a certain way based on observed actions and preset/programmed reactions. Privacy plays a role considering that people are also being monitored and observed at all times when interacting with the robotic animals. All the data gathered from people watching is being used to ‘teach’ the robots about how they should be interacting with people. Is it possible to replace the interactions we currently have with animals to the ones we could have with robots? I think are judgment can depend on the interaction and curiosity with the new form of petting zoo. Likewise, the robotic animals all have the same for of expressing emotion whereas animals react differently depending on the type of animal it is and how comfortable it is around people. It’s possible that we can be bias to agree and encourage robotic petting zoo’s as they provide a new way of interacting with animal like creatures without have real animals in captivity. The article Nano Robot Spy Hummingbird Moves Just Like a Real Bird, shares how AeroVironment, a company which focuses on technological and engineered solution, has worked to develop a robotic hummingbird that acts just like a real life hummingbird. They company created this robotic bird with a partnership with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). DARPA would just this robot for indoor and outdoor surveillance missions. Interestingly enough DARPA requested the robot to have a bird like body and wings. Not only that but they are also working on surveillance insects.
Something that caught my attention because it is different than the rest of the robotic animals I have looked into is that in the case there was a government agency requesting to have this robotic bird. More specifically this agency focuses on the development of technologies for the military. Unlike the rest of the developed robotic animals that may be used for environmental and natural research this one would only be used as a surveillance and for military use. Some ethical concerns that come to mind are is it okay for biomimicry and the recreation of animals by used for surveillance? Should they be allowed as part of the military? And is this violating privacy? I personally don’t think robotic animals should be used for surveillance. I think people are still very unaware as to the creating of these AI animals and if not notified that they exist they will not know they are jeopardizing their rights to privacy. I think I similar issue arose with the increase of drones and regulations that needed to be followed. Biomimicry inspired robots in the military are also an ethical concern because they can be considered wrong or right depending on the usage. For instance, the surveillance birds can be useful to be track wounded soldiers and civilians. However, it could also be to track and harass others. When I think of robots the first thing that comes to mind is cold metal pieces put together that create something like transformers or machines. You might think all robots are just hunks of cold and stiff material. However, researchers at the University of Pittsburgh have been working to develop a robot that is squishy or “soft”, a much more flexible and warn approach to robots. The article, Squishy robots from shape-shifting, self-powered material could mimic living things, talks about the inspiration behind the squishy robot. The researchers are looking to develop a new material that would allow the robot to reconfigure its own shape and be much more flexible that standard robots. The technology behind this robot is a computational model and synthetic polymer gel. This gel is powerful as it can generate chemical energy which would allow for the robot to shape-shift and self-sustained propulsion. The gel is able to shape-shift because the gel is made of Belousov-Zhabotinsky and spirobenzopyran. Those two gels have materials that can move in an oozing manner and they contain ring structures that can move when exposed to light. The robot is designed to function as a computational model because they want it to function autonomously. The robot will be able to move and change shapes with the manipulation of the gel to create different movements. This squishy robot would be developed in such a way so that it can function all on its own without using batteries nor wires. The design and concept of the robot is mimicking amoeba, which is a cell or organism that can change its shape. I think having a robot that is soft and flexible is a very interesting concept that can have many advantages. I think the soft material would make it ideal for places or actions that require a more delicate touch. Some things that come to mind for the use of these robots are for medical purposes and experiments. Something the one of the authors of the study, Dr. Kuksenok, said was “ability to grab and carry something isn’t impeded by non-flexible, hard edges”. I think this robot would be of great use with children that need medical attention or with patients that need more delicate and gentle attention. I see the benefits of this robot in specific fields and can see how it can benefit the way we look and approach the development of robots in the future. In the article, Will adults of the future care about nature if robots replace pets when they are kids?. I found the article to be very insightful about the future of robotic animals and how they might play a part in our lives. It is noted that people who did not grow up at the peek of technology might have less of a connection with robotic dogs. Likewise, those who grew up with real dogs or cats are less likely to feel the same connection with a robotic pet. On the other hand, younger kids who have experience interacting with technology are more likely to respond to the robotic dogs. They can actually benefit from having them as their pets. Kids are able to give their robotic friend their very own personalities and due to advancements in artificial intelligence they will eventually be able to mimic and learn from their owners.
Advancements in artificial intelligence will allow robotic pets to learn and might be more impactful and teaching experience for the kids or owners of the robot. Being able to learn from humans will help the robotic animal to better integrate into real world scenarios and places. Technology in pets can help us learn about how kids can potentially benefit from learning about animals and they might be inclined to protect and help the environment. Although, kids can learn from their robotic pets it can also lead them not caring about other animals, creatures, and nature. Real life pets allow children to learn about responsibility. Most of the responsibility is learned from picking up after the pet, taking them for a walk, and feeding them. However, with robotic pets they are not responsible for any of those things which can lead to not care about other’s welfare. Having responsibility of another living thing can help people empathize with another being and nature because one has to commit to taking care of it. Another thing related to issues with robotic pets is that it can lead to the mentality that technology can easily replace nature. Having these thoughts can cause kids to not be committed to nature and real animals and be quick to dismiss problems related to animals and nature. Overall, I think there are pros and cons to robotic pets. Some people can relate the robots to nature and be able to appreciate both, however, others may be think nature and animals can be replaced by technology. Robots have changed the way we humans and other creatures do things in our daily lives and also how we interact with each other. Likewise, robots are helping us identify problems and develop a solution. From the article, Why put a computer in a fish? I can see how this robotic fish is helping us save our environment.
The robotic fish was developed by zoologists and engineers to help detect marine pollution. The robotic fish is capable of swimming autonomously and takes samples of the water every two minutes. One of the real cool things about this robotic fish is that it can analyze and report the sample finding back to scientists pretty instantly. This is great because it can help scientist see and detect the exact location where something is not functioning correctly. The robot is not only designed to look like a fish to better blend with the real fish but because it is also better equipped to mimic the movements and more efficiently move through the water. Some of the technology behind this robotic fish is a combination of artificial intelligence, robotic design, chemical analysis, underwater communication, and hydrodynamics. The technology used is designed to allow the robotic fish to easily move in the water and be resistant from some decay that can happen while in salt water and from some bites that other fish might give it. The robotic fish also contains software that allows it to move autonomously through the water and collect and analyze samples. I think these robotic fish are a really interesting technology that allows us to test for marine pollution without requiring too much effort from us and with less interruption to marine life. Likewise, in the long run it can help us protect more marine life from pollution and can help educate us about how to have better habits and be more environmentally conscious. The only problem I can see with having robotic animals in the water is that real life fish might be attracted to electromagnetic fields and could be harmed. Another similar situation is that the environment is contaminated by having robots in the ocean. An example I can think of is that a robot falls apart and the robot pieces are unable to be recovered by scientists. Those pieces felt behind could negatively impact the ocean and the marine life living there. |
Archives
May 2017
Categories |