4 ms·
Why don't they have 360 vision? Why does it need to turn its head or it's torso? Maybe just to make it more humanoid?
by firecall 2y ago
Why don't they have 360 vision?
Why does it need to turn its head or it's torso?
Maybe just to make it more humanoid?
- kylebenzle 2y agoI am surprised by how much we have stuck to the human-shaped robot, seems like an octopus or something would be better.
- bagels 2y agoWould that be better accepted by the public or robot buyer?
- rangestransform 2y agoThe entire built environment to date is designed for humans It’s the same reason why companies are throwing money at a self driving car which can coexist with manually driven cars, rather than building roads specifically for autonomy
- dexwiz 2y agoWhy build autonomous roads? Just invest in modern railways at that point.
- rangestransform 2y agoBecause building anything infrastructure related in the US, especially for rail, is a such a Sisyphean task that it might actually be cheaper to just build an autonomous vehicle
- cryptonector 2y agoWhat's that got to do with vision? They could have given it more cameras to avoid having to have a head to turn. That was OP's point.
- SauntSolaire 2y agoThey're responding to the person recommending octopus robots, not the vision comment.
- JKCalhoun 2y agoSix more arms would be considerably heavier. Especially wasteful if, often, six of the arms are not even doing anything.
- dartos 2y agoIt’s probably a cost benefit thing. How much do you benefit from 360 vision vs front facing camera. You also get some relative directional information as well with the current design.