3 ms·

Uncanny valley isn't real. It's just an artifact from the fact most people see robots on video. Any latency we will just adapt to quite naturally. At worst it

Uncanny valley isn't real. It's just an artifact from the fact most people see robots on video. Any latency we will just adapt to quite naturally. At worst it means Blade Runner style robots can't work 100% off the cloud. Personally I think caching would deal with most issues. How often does anyone ever surprise you with a sentence.

PhasmaFelis 11y ago
> Uncanny valley isn't real. It's just an artifact from the fact most people see robots on video. I can't make that make sense. Could you elaborate?
- jonathankoren 11y ago
  The uncanny valley is talked about as if it's a real phenomena, but it's never actually been observed. It's just a hypothesis. It's as much of a product of media as anything.
  - PhasmaFelis 11y ago
    That sounds a lot like saying that, I dunno, coulrophobia (the fear of clowns) isn't real, because it's never been observed in a laboratory setting. The specific theories about how the uncanny valley functions and what it says about human psychology may be bunk, but the basic idea--that things that look almost but not quite human can come off as very creepy--is borne out by countless humans' personal experiences.
    - jonathankoren 11y ago
      Personally, I think "uncanny valley" is merely a useful short cut when talking about unsatisfactory simulacrums. Whether or not it comes off as creepy is irrelevant.
  - PascalsMugger 11y ago
    The uncanny valley was (I think) first observed in graphical rendering for movies and games, and has since been generalized to many artificial constructs that approach but don't quite hit the real thing they are attempting to mimic. It absolutely is real, but may not always apply.
- aaron695 11y ago
  http://boingboing.net/2013/09/03/the-uncanny-valley-might-not-a.html http://boingboing.net/2013/09/03/the-uncanny-valley-might-no... Think about it, have YOU ever seen it? We've all seen videos, but no real life robots in the uncanny valley. If it did exist it'd make an amazing art exhibit for starters. If you've seen Ron Mueck work in real life you'll notice it's cool, but far different to the pictures. 2D has a way of evoking emotions that's not possible in 3D.
  - cskau 11y ago
    > Think about it, have YOU ever seen it? We've all seen videos, but no real life robots in the uncanny valley. Isn't that kinda like saying: Think about it, have YOU ever seen atomic bombs? We've all seen videos, but no real life atomic bombs. They're not real!
    - zardo 11y ago
      Nuclear reactions aren't a theory about human psychology. It would be really weird if nuclear reactions seemed to work when we filmed them but not in the reality. It doesn't seem that strange that people might feel differently about an object than a video of that object.
  - PhasmaFelis 11y ago
    > Think about it, have YOU ever seen it? Uh, yes? Hiroshi Ishiguro's creepy robot double in the original article, just for starters. > We've all seen videos, but no real life robots in the uncanny valley. Wait, what? Are you saying that a thing that looks creepy in videos is no indication that the same thing will look creepy in real life? I don't understand.

PhasmaFelis 11y ago

> Uncanny valley isn't real. It's just an artifact from the fact most people see robots on video. I can't make that make sense. Could you elaborate?

jonathankoren 11y ago
The uncanny valley is talked about as if it's a real phenomena, but it's never actually been observed. It's just a hypothesis. It's as much of a product of media as anything.
- PhasmaFelis 11y ago
  That sounds a lot like saying that, I dunno, coulrophobia (the fear of clowns) isn't real, because it's never been observed in a laboratory setting. The specific theories about how the uncanny valley functions and what it says about human psychology may be bunk, but the basic idea--that things that look almost but not quite human can come off as very creepy--is borne out by countless humans' personal experiences.
  - jonathankoren 11y ago
    Personally, I think "uncanny valley" is merely a useful short cut when talking about unsatisfactory simulacrums. Whether or not it comes off as creepy is irrelevant.
- PascalsMugger 11y ago
  The uncanny valley was (I think) first observed in graphical rendering for movies and games, and has since been generalized to many artificial constructs that approach but don't quite hit the real thing they are attempting to mimic. It absolutely is real, but may not always apply.
aaron695 11y ago
http://boingboing.net/2013/09/03/the-uncanny-valley-might-not-a.html http://boingboing.net/2013/09/03/the-uncanny-valley-might-no... Think about it, have YOU ever seen it? We've all seen videos, but no real life robots in the uncanny valley. If it did exist it'd make an amazing art exhibit for starters. If you've seen Ron Mueck work in real life you'll notice it's cool, but far different to the pictures. 2D has a way of evoking emotions that's not possible in 3D.
- cskau 11y ago
  > Think about it, have YOU ever seen it? We've all seen videos, but no real life robots in the uncanny valley. Isn't that kinda like saying: Think about it, have YOU ever seen atomic bombs? We've all seen videos, but no real life atomic bombs. They're not real!
  - zardo 11y ago
    Nuclear reactions aren't a theory about human psychology. It would be really weird if nuclear reactions seemed to work when we filmed them but not in the reality. It doesn't seem that strange that people might feel differently about an object than a video of that object.
- PhasmaFelis 11y ago
  > Think about it, have YOU ever seen it? Uh, yes? Hiroshi Ishiguro's creepy robot double in the original article, just for starters. > We've all seen videos, but no real life robots in the uncanny valley. Wait, what? Are you saying that a thing that looks creepy in videos is no indication that the same thing will look creepy in real life? I don't understand.