Ich habe grade ein kleines Interview mit Deutschlandradio Kultur geführt, in dem es um die Zukunft, Tech und Roboter ging. Das komplette Interview sowie die Sendung, für die das aufgezeichnet wurde, blogge ich hier dann, sobald es online ist. Kurz danach ist dann zufällig dieses Posting von Mike Loukides bei O'Reilly Radar durch den Feedreader gerutscht und das ist inhaltlich recht nahe an dem, was ich da erzählt habe. Die letzten zwei Sätze sind der Knaller:
In 1945, a modern dishwasher would have been a miracle, as exotic as the space-age appliances in The Jetsons. But now, it’s just a dishwasher, and we’re trying to think of ways to make it more intelligent and network-enabled. Dishwashers, refrigerators, vacuums, stoves: is the mythical Internet-enabled refrigerator that orders milk when you’re running low a robot? What about a voice-controlled baking machine, where you walk up and tell it what kind of bread you want? Will we think of these as robots?
I doubt it. Much has been made of Google’s autonomous vehicles. Impressive as they are, autonomous robots are nowhere near as interesting as assistive robots, robots that assist humans in some difficult task. Driving around town is one thing, but BMW already has automatic parallel parking. But do we call these “robotic cars”? What about anti-lock brakes and other forms of computer-assisted driving that have been around for years? A modern airliner essentially flies itself from one airport to another, but do we see a Boeing 777 as a “robot”? We prefer not to, perhaps because we cherish the illusion that a human pilot is doing the flying. Robots are everywhere already; we’ve just trained ourselves not to see them. […]
We might have found Rosie, the Jetsons’ robotic maid, impressive. But the Jetsons didn’t.
O'Reilly Radar: Robots will remain forever in the future