3 ms·

I watched the video and the robot most certainly did not grab the boy's index finger. Sequence of events 1. The robot was capturing the boy's queen with a bis

I watched the video and the robot most certainly did not grab the boy's index finger. Sequence of events 1. The robot was capturing the boy's queen with a bishop. For that, it first removed the queen from the board. 2a. The robot next moved the bishop onto the square where the queen was previously located. 2b. At the same time, the boy prematurely moved his rook to the same square, he completed the move before the bishop has been placed on the square 3. The robot completed its final downward motion to place the bishop onto the square while the boy's fingers were still on the rook, thus pinning the index finger between the bishop and the rook The robot didn't do anything it wasn't programmed to do

Schiendelman 4y ago
Right, this is why when we have robots that operate around humans we make sure they sense behaviors like that, and that they don’t use enough force to hurt humans.
- throwaways85989 4y ago
  Something like https://www.kuka.com/en-de/products/robot-systems/industrial-robots/lbr-iiwa https://www.kuka.com/en-de/products/robot-systems/industrial... with adaptable force parameters should have been used.
imtringued 4y ago
Yeah this isn't a case of rogue AI, it is a case of the stupid variety that does exactly what you tell it to, which includes crushing fingers if those happen to be in its path.
akhmatova 4y ago
This attempt to exculpate the robot's actions (more more directly: the actions of its human programmers) is just ... bizarre. Yeah, the robot didn't specifically "grab" the boy's finger. It grabbed a piece while the boy's finger was still on it. Without having any idea what it was doing. Same thing, in other words -- in terms of the end result. And more to the point, it was an action that a human player would most likely have bounced back from, before completing the intended motion. The robot didn't do anything it wasn't programmed to do. Yup, it sure didn't. And that's precisely the problem.
- Brian_K_White 4y ago
  The robot didn't do anything. Some humans rented a machine and inexpertly operated it, no different than if I rented a back hoe and dug up a power line. There is nothing to contest when people observe this fact.
  - selcuka 4y ago
    No one is blaming the robot, but that doesn't change the fact that it's clearly not fit for purpose unlike a back hoe. A robot is expected to be smarter than a back hoe as it works autonomously, especially when it is designed to be operated near a child.

Schiendelman 4y ago

Right, this is why when we have robots that operate around humans we make sure they sense behaviors like that, and that they don’t use enough force to hurt humans.

throwaways85989 4y ago
Something like https://www.kuka.com/en-de/products/robot-systems/industrial-robots/lbr-iiwa https://www.kuka.com/en-de/products/robot-systems/industrial... with adaptable force parameters should have been used.

imtringued 4y ago

Yeah this isn't a case of rogue AI, it is a case of the stupid variety that does exactly what you tell it to, which includes crushing fingers if those happen to be in its path.

akhmatova 4y ago

This attempt to exculpate the robot's actions (more more directly: the actions of its human programmers) is just ... bizarre. Yeah, the robot didn't specifically "grab" the boy's finger. It grabbed a piece while the boy's finger was still on it. Without having any idea what it was doing. Same thing, in other words -- in terms of the end result. And more to the point, it was an action that a human player would most likely have bounced back from, before completing the intended motion. The robot didn't do anything it wasn't programmed to do. Yup, it sure didn't. And that's precisely the problem.

Brian_K_White 4y ago
The robot didn't do anything. Some humans rented a machine and inexpertly operated it, no different than if I rented a back hoe and dug up a power line. There is nothing to contest when people observe this fact.
- selcuka 4y ago
  No one is blaming the robot, but that doesn't change the fact that it's clearly not fit for purpose unlike a back hoe. A robot is expected to be smarter than a back hoe as it works autonomously, especially when it is designed to be operated near a child.