In Our Image

In Our Image

In Our Image

Care-O-bot 4

Developers did not want its appearance to be over-human, as this would “encourage false expectations with regard to its capabilities” for users…
Read the complete article that Manuel and Sam are discussing at:

Care-O-bot 4 Is the Robot Servant

In this post the dialogue is realised by an interaction of virtual characters, for more information please check the page “Virtual characters

Manuel

Hi Sam! I came across an interesting blogpost on robots and empathy …

Today 11:34   

Sam

Hi Manuel! So now you want to chat about robots? 😅😅         

Today 11:35  

Manuel

Yep! 😁

Today 11:36  

Sam

 .. Be my guest!                                                                                 

Today 11:37

Manuel

So this blog was all about Uncanny Valley and how we relate to robots 🤖

Today 11:37  

Sam

Yeah, uncanny valley really is a problem 🤔...   we really want to make robots that people can relate to, but it’s hard!

Today 11:38

Manuel

Seems like it makes more sense not to try …?

Today 11:38   

Sam

How do you mean?  🤔 🤔                                                               

Today 11:39  

Manuel

Well, you’re the expert, but I seem to understand that it is easier to make a friendly, relatable robot that doesn’t look like a human at all

Today 11:39  

Sam

Ah, ok, yes, in a sense, yes …                                                         

Today 11:40  

Manuel

… but …? 😏

Today 11:43   

Sam

For some tasks a human form makes no sense at all, e.g. industrial robots 🤖

Today 11:45   

Manuel

Right 👍

Today 11:45   

Sam

But in most places where humans and robots work together, everything is built for humans

Today 11:46

Manuel

Ooh, that is a problem!

Today 11:46  

Sam

So we need robots that can interact with stuff made for humans.

Today 11:46  

Manuel

Mmh, I see, so body and limbs etc. need to be human shaped

Today 11:46   

Sam

Doorknobs are made for hands , keyboards and switches for fingers ☝️, stairs for legs 🦵, etc.

Today 11:46   

Manuel

So that’s why an artificial human would be a good appraoch

Today 11:47   

Sam

In many cases that’s exactly what you need, but there are lots of reasons why a human shape makes sense!

Today 11:48   

… Continue to read the conversation between Manuel and Sam 
on Saturday 3rd April…

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (4 votes, average: 4.25 out of 5)
Loading...

Related post

 

Domo Arigato Mr. Roboto

Domo Arigato Mr. Roboto

Domo Arigato Mr. Roboto

Imagine a craftsman being awakened suddenly in the dead of night. He searches downstairs for something among a crowd of mannequins in his workshop.
If the mannequins started to move, it would be like a horror story.

Masahiro Mori

The Uncanny Valley

When looking at a robot we sometimes experience the “Uncanny valley” effect …

We feel an increased sense of affinity with a humanoid robot the more human it looks, but right before becoming indistinguishable from a human, we experience a sense of revulsion or dissociation.

We feel that something is wrong. We don’t have this with robots that don’t look like humans at all: Johnny 5, R2-D2, HAL 9000, or Wall-E, despite the fact that we certainly have an emotional response to them.

Yes, even to HAL! When Dave starts shutting HAL down, we hear HAL regressing while pleading with Dave to stop. When HAL saysI am afraid, Dave. My mind is going. I can feel it”, Dave reacts and responds emotionally to HAL, even trying to comfort him when he feels HAL is no longer a threat. On the other hand, some robots are so convincingly human that we forget they are robots at all, like D.A.R.Y.L. or Seven of Nine (technically a cyborg), “The Doctor” (technically a hologram), and Data from StarTrek.

We experience the uncanny valley specifically when a thing looks human enough that it invites an initial emotional response, while on closer inspection showing clear signs of being unable to reciprocate that: the CB2 child robot, Saya, HRP-4C, Sophia, etc.

Especially with movements and facial expressions, if they do not proceed smoothly and harmoniously, the whole Gestalt of human appearance breaks down: “small faults in their humanness might send the social interaction tumbling” (Mathur & Reichling 2016, 30). We are now repulsed by how alien the thing confronting us actually is. The uncanny valley effect occurs when we try to empathize with a robot: it cannot experience us as we experience them (Gray & Wegner 2012, 129). We cannot expect understanding or reciprocity from the robot: there is no “there” there. So we feel betrayed in our emotional response, the apparent humanity of the robot was just an empathic illusion.

More information at …

https://spectrum.ieee.org/automaton/robotics/humanoids/the-uncanny-valley

どうもありがとう  MR Roboto

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading...

Related post

 

Mind over Matter

Mind over Matter

Mind over Matter

You, your joys and your sorrows, your memories and ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behaviour of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules.

Who you are is nothing but a pack of neurons.

So although we appear to have free will, in fact, our choices have already been predetermined for us and we cannot change that.

Francis Crick, The Astonishing Hypothesis, 1994

 

 https://xkcd.com/876/
A webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language

In this post the dialogue is realised by an interaction of virtual characters, for more information please check the page “Virtual characters

Cho

I’ve been thinking about this idea of Searle, that consciousness would be a biological product … 🤔

Today 11:36   

Julia

Yes, it would be exactly like digestion he says

Today 11:36  

Cho

Right, as a neuroscientist I do find that compelling, but …                 

Today 11:37

Julia

… but? 🤔

Today 11:38   

Cho

… well, one the one hand biological brains seems to be the only thing we know for sure is or has consciousness

Today 11:40  

Julia

So you think he is right?

We are our brains, more or less?

Today 11:42  

Cho

… but on the other hand, the mind seems to be something very very different from …

the result of digestion … 💩 

Today 11:43 

Julia

Eeeewww 🤢  yeah, sure! 

Today 11:44   

Cho

We figured out a lot about what goes out inside our own bodies by looking at what comes out of it, but minds don’t really do that

Today 11:45   

Julia

How do you mean? 🤨

Today 11:46   

Cho

I read about behaviorism at the beginning of your paper: we can’t study the mind directly, so we study behavior

Today 11:46   

Cho

A belief or a desire would just be the inclination to behave in a certain way

Today 11:47   

Julia

Aha 😊…  so behavior would be the way that the mind expresses itself on the outside? 

Today 11:47

Cho

Yes, in a sense.

But that’s the rub: behavior doesn’t explain the mind, the mind explains behavior, so what do we gain by reducing the mind to behavior?

Today 11:48   

 

Julia

I’d expected you to say that the brain causes and explains behavior …  😅

Today 11:48 

Cho

I wish stuff were that simple! 😅

We can’t explain all behavior just by pointing at the brain.                

Today 11:49   

Cho

It might turn out to be true in general, but for now we don’t understand the brain well enough yet  🧠

Today 11:49   

Julia

So you think Searle is wrong in the end?

Today 11:50 

Cho

I don’t think the mind and consciousness are as straightforwardly biological as digestion, no.

And then there is another problem …

Today 11:50   

Julia

Which is …? 🤔

Today 11:51 

Cho

If consciouness were just like a biological secretion, then it would likely just be purely automatic and involuntary

Today 11:52   

Cho

We don’t really control our digestion, in the sense of all the intestinal movements and chemistry, etc.
….. but I’m quite sure I’m in control of my life, up to a point 😊

Today 11:52   

Julia

That’s what I also argue in the conclusion! 😁

Today 11:53 

Cho

Indeed, and I agree with you, in the end.  👍🏻

There must be more going on than just biology.                                  

Today 11:53   

Julia

Thank you so much! ☺️

I’ll finish up the essay, your comments have been very helpful!

Today 11:54 

Cho

No problem  ☺️

I got at least as much out of this as you did.                                         

Today 11:56   

… The end 

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (2 votes, average: 4.00 out of 5)
Loading...

I’m in my Head, Thinking my Thoughts

I’m in my Head, Thinking my Thoughts

I’m in my Head, Thinking my Thoughts

By ratiocination, I mean computation. […] all ratiocination is comprehended in these two operations of the mind, addition and substraction.

Thomas Hobbes, De Corpore, 1655

 

https://www.consciousentities.com/2013/02/feral-neurons/

 

In this post the dialogue is realised by an interaction of virtual characters, for more information please check the page “Virtual characters

Julia

Thanks again for all the information! 🙏

I’ve vastly improved my essay already 😊

Today 11:32  

Cho

I also learnt a great deal. I am used to just thinking of brains as machinery ⚙️

Today 11:36   

Julia

There actually is a position a bit like that … 🤷🏼‍♀️

Today 11:36  

Cho

You mean the one with the “homunculi” … ?                                  

Today 11:37

Julia

Right, that’s latin for “little person”…

you’d actually be like a little man sitting in a theatre, looking at all your sensations, and trying to make sense of them

Today 11:38   

Cho

You’re making me regret not having done latin and greek now … 😅

but isn’t that the position he criticizes?

Today 11:40  

Julia

Yes, but he changes it around a bit.

If the actual “you” would be like a little person in your head, wouldn’t this “little person” need one of their own?

Today 11:42   

 

Cho

Right, an infinite regress of observes within observers that in the end fail to explain anything about consciousness

Today 11:43 

Julia

Indeed, then he came up with the idea of a whole bunch of “homunculi” that do really simple stuff, like detect lines or colors, 

Today 11:44   

Julia

then some combining those into simple shapes, like “read triangle”, and further down the line complex shapes, like “a rose” 🌹 

Today 11:44   

Cho

And that sounds a bit weird, but then he links that to neural machinery, and it becomes almost trivial … 😊

Today 11:45   

Julia

But he means it like a kind of mental software running on the neural hardware, it is not exactly like the identity theory

Today 11:46   

Cho

No, that’s right, you explain that very clearly in the paper 📄Someone like that would argue that you can run the same software on many different types of hardware

Today 11:46   

Julia

Yes, so that would account for neurodiversity? Right?

Today 11:47

Cho

I’m quite tempted to say yes, it does sound very convincing, but then he wants to run it on computers too …

Today 11:48   

 

Julia

You think that can’t be done?

Today 11:49 

Cho

Well, I’m no programmer, but at least nowadays I don’t think we have computers that are big enough or fast enough.

So, … maybe?🤔

Today 11:49   

Julia

Do you think there is something special about the brain itself that allows us to think and be conscious?

Today 11:50 

Cho

Ah! I can see where you are going with this. That’s Searle’s theory, right?

Today 11:50   

Julia

Right!

Today 11:51 

Cho

I’ll have to think about it a bit more …🧐                                            

Today 11:52   

… Continue to read the conversation between Julia and Cho 
on Saturday 6th February…

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (2 votes, average: 4.00 out of 5)
Loading...

Related post

My brain is me (Part 1/4)

Mental Brains (Part 2/4)

I’m in my head thinking my thoughts (this article, Part 3/4)

Mind over matter (Part 4/4)