geeksunleashed.net - New Website Planned with Robotics Forum

So basically what you're saying is that instead of a global, fault
tolerant, peer-to-peer message board we should use some message board
you have set up on a computer you keep at your parents' house, and we
should do that because you are going to spam us?

-chris.

 > So basically what you're saying is that instead of a global, fault
 > tolerant, peer-to-peer message board we should use some message board
 > you have set up on a computer you keep at your parents' house, and we
 > should do that because you are going to spam us?
 >
 > -chris.

Chris

No, that is what you are saying.

If you think it is some kind of conspiracy you are dead wrong.

Before you go shooting your mouth off like a fool and attack the
character of a member here you should get your facts staight.

I am no expert in the issues you mentioned, but it sounds like you are.

Maybe you could be so kind as to help me with any technical issue
relating to:

1. of using a Fedora Core 4 installation
2. of using Apache HTTP server
3. of using a mature product Joomla to help manage the web site
4. of hosting my own HTTP server at home rather than some server in
the        USA, New Zealand, Russia, South Africa, or anywhwere else
5. of posting here frequently that the FAQ is hosted on a particular

    Website, as is standard practice on Newsgroups.

I have been frequenting this Newsgroup for a number of years on and off,
and for those of you that have read my posts here, I have not spammed on
a single occasion.

You may also recall that I posted a FAQ authored by a member here on
another website some time ago. I contacted that person, obviously a
long-standing member, and he was happy for me to post the FAQ, and
obviously it served a useful purpose. There was no spam from me then.


The purpose of setting up a HTTP server on my own machine is that of
gaining skills with Linux, and just the exercise as a whole - and it's
fun and cool. It also costs me $0 as I host the site directly - I don't
have to pay for a hosting service, and I can configure the server just
the way I choose.

Also, I would like to set up a global community.

Also, it will be set up whether you agree with it or not.

:-]

Dale Stewart

I don't see any particular advantage to starting yet another robotics
newsgroup/forum. There are already so many as is.

-Michael

Michael wrote:


Well I guess that's the great thing about freedom of speech and
expression to offer alternatives to almost any other topic, technology
or Website.

:-]

Dale

The Internet provides a great platform for anyone to exercise their
freedom of speech, but that doesn't mean anyone will listen.

As Michael says, there are so many robotics Web sites already. Most have
few members, or at least the forums have few messages. What's the point?
Many are set up to sell Google ads with some idea the admins will make
money -- which, of course, they don't.

If you're going to start a new forum may I suggest you do something
different. In another thread a person was asking about a forum
supporting a LOCAL users group. That's something different. A group that
discusses only AVR robotics, or submersible robotics, or Microsoft
Robotics Studio, that's different. Now, all of these have been done, but
surely there's an niche out there not yet exploited.

-- Gordon

Hi Dale, I hope you'll recall we've always had friendly exchanges, at
least that's how I remember our exchanges, so you will understand my
tone is intended to be useful criticism. On the whole, I have to agree
with Gordon. Every time I hear about this new group or that new group,
I cringe. There are enough groups aplenty. Perhaps you recall my
thread about DARPA GC killing robotics. The posts here are way down. I
argued even though there were many groups added along the way, their
posts were down too. So adding one more group to a shrinking pool of
participation is a tactic akin to "Divide and Conquer." Best wishes
with your effort, but I do not rejoice at having the option of joining
some other forum. I'd much rather see your efforts directed here where
you are known, than off with a few others to another quiet ending.

--
Randy M. Dumse
www.newmicros.com
Objects in mirror are more confused than they appear.

Hi all

Thanks for your feedback everyone.

You make good points that I hadn't thought about.

Maybe I could keep some archived topics from here and as well have a FAQ
for noobs that could also include links to other Websites and resources.
This would act as a supplement to discussions here. And also have a
direction to here!

As the name suggests geeksunleashed! is intended to be a bit of a mixed
bag of geeky stuff.

The project was up and running until Apache stopped working after an
Email server was installed so I have to resurrect it.

I set it up over the Summer break as a project for something to do, and
even if it is not the most awesome site in history, it gives me some
basic skills that could prove useful. And if it provides some help to
others  that's all good.

Cheers

:-]

Dale



RMDumse wrote:

     I missed that.

     Actually, what seems to be killing US hobbyist robotics is that
most of the robots aren't much smarter than they were twenty years ago.
Really, it's awfully late to be using a Basic Stamp, a machine that
predates the Apple II, and Polaroid sonars as dumb echo-rangers,
which people were doing in the 1980s.

     The parts are out there.  Webcams are cheap.  Stereo vision
software is available for download.  Accelerometer chips are cheap,
as are rate gyros.  R/C servos with real digital interfaces are
available.  You can buy 22 degree of freedom humanoid robots for
about $1000.  And R/F data links are easy to obtain.

     On the theory side, planning is well understood,
SLAM is now understood, and sensor fusion for gyro/accelerometer/compass
is well understood.  On the tool front, 3D simulators are available.
Microsoft even has a whole tool set.

     From a hardware perspective, you could put together something with
80-90% of the hardware functionality of an Asimo for under $5K.  Maybe
less.

     And what are we seeing?  Battery-Motor-Wheels R/C wedgebots.
FIRST, over and over again.  Line followers.  iRobot's vacuum
cleaner as a robotics base.  This is not progress.

     Went to the Maker Faire in San Mateo yesterday.  Huge robotics
area, very little novelty.  One RoboNova, which wasn't working
because its R/C receiver had been pulled for use in a wedgebot.
Big Battlebot arena, with the usual R/C things.  Yawn.

     Check out "http://www.robots-dreams.com" .  That's where things
are happening.

                    John Nagle

John:

While I agree that the pieces are cheap, the system integration
is not.  Lot's of people have big ideas for robots, but get
seriously bogged down in the integration issues.  I know
that is my current state of affairs.

When it comes to robotics, the conclusion I've come to is that
talk is cheap.  If you think it is so easy to build an interesting
robot for a modest sum of money, please do so and show it to the
world.  I am personally inviting you to come to one of our HBRC
club meetings to show us any robot creation that you want.  I would
honestly like to see what you can do, since you provide such
knowledgable feedback on this list.

The reason why I am in hobby robotics is because it separates
the doers from talkers.  I'd like to think of myself as a member
of camp that gets things done.  What camp are you in?

-Wayne

     Well, I did spend three years running a DARPA Grand Challenge
team.  We produced a working, but slow, vehicle, which
made it to the California Speedway eliminations.

                John Nagle

Did you view Overbot to to be an amateur effort?
What was your budget?  How long was it from the time
you bought the vehicle and other pieces until you
had working integerated platform?  Was it easy?
Why do you think it would be so much easier to put
together a humaniod robot?

The statement below:

     From a hardware perspective, you could put together
     something with 80-90% of the hardware functionality
     of an Asimo for under $5K.  Maybe less.

If it is so easy, why don't *you* do so and then show us way?

-Wayne

On Mon, 21 May 2007 05:40:45 GMT, "Wayne C. Gramlich"


It isn't hard, it just requires a little bit of R&D funding.

http://www.bioloid.info/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=BrainEngineering+BrainBot

See also http://www.huv.com/blog

24 DOF (once I add the grippers), stereo vision (wireless), high
performance on-board processing (600 MHz gumstix), wifi to host PC, 6-axis
IMU, etc.

Later,
Jon

--------------------------------------------------------------
   Jon Hylands      Jon@huv.com      http://www.huv.com/jon

  Project: Micro Raptor (Small Biped Velociraptor Robot)
           http://www.huv.com/blog

There's something wrong with the economics here.

It IS hard to produce something like the Bioloid at an affordable price
point. I think the world of the Bioloid platform, and the engineering
that went into it was anything but cheap. Yes, any competent
manufacturing facility could create it, but the reason more aren't doing
it is that they can probably make more money producing something else.

R&D funding requires some expectation that the investors -- private,
commercial, or the government -- will get something back. Hobby and
educational robotics is a niche market. It's not a dead market, it's a
niche market, and the money spent on it is finite.

The fact is, with the exception of a few specialty products like the
Roomba, and the high-end R&D platform like the Pioneer, there really is
no business in small robots. People build them because of the economies
of scale, and naturally they will be limited. When size and budget no
longer matter, the Bioloids, the Asimos, the Qrios, and others are
possible. Hopefully, someday, the companies that make these will turn a
profit on them.

-- Gordon

On Mon, 21 May 2007 08:20:09 -0700, Gordon McComb


I agree - BrainBot is being funded because the people paying the bills want
a small, simple R&D platform so they can do the real research they want to
do - AI, vision, object manipulation, walking. You simply can't buy a robot
today for less than $50,000 that lets you do that.


I think the point was, technology has gotten to the point where a competent
engineer can build a platform that is close to a functionally equivalent to
a million dollar platform for under $5000. Until someone writes the
software that turns humanoid robots into something truly remarkable, they
will remain in the niche category.

I believe that it won't be a giant research lab that cracks the AI puzzle -
it will be one or two really smart guys, in a garage somewhere, playing
with small advanced robots like the one above.

Later,
Jon

--------------------------------------------------------------
   Jon Hylands      Jon@huv.com      http://www.huv.com/jon

  Project: Micro Raptor (Small Biped Velociraptor Robot)
           http://www.huv.com/blog

I think it's more capitalist than that. If the market is there, someone
would do it. The demand isn't there yet for a business to take this kind
of risk. The gobment sometimes funds these things -- as they did Grand
Challenge -- but even that funding is peanuts. I'd bet overall the
participants invested 10, maybe 50 times what Uncle Sam put up. Of
course, that was the idea! <g>

My personal belief is that the *mechanics* are lacking. The engineering
exists, but it still costs money, lots of money, to build something
reliable that is also inexpensive. As "good and cheap" seldom meet at
the same place and time, there is nothing (yet) to write software for.

I also think there is a problem with liability. Japan has different
personal liabilities laws, so they are leading us in humanoid robotics.
Here in the US if a bipedal robot falls over and bangs up Mickey it'll
result in a multi-million dollar lawsuit that no manufacturer could
weather, even with insurance. Who wants to make and sell a product that
has the potential to be their financial ruin? For this reason we'll be
only seeing Roombas in the home for a long time to come.

-- Gordon

I agree with your point about the Basic Stamp, though there are a lot of
much better options today which many people are using.

I don't agree, though, that lack of smarts is what's really holding the
hobby back.  You said yourself:


...but most of the robots there (i.e. in Japan) are not particularly
smart at all; they're mostly remote-controlled.  They do have autonomous
events, but the amount of smarts going into them isn't much beyond what
goes into a sumo bot (though the Japanese are generally mopping the
floor with us in sumo competitions, too).

So what's the difference?  One thing is the emphasis in Japan on
humanoid robotics, which tends to capture the imagination of the general
public much more than (as you say) wedgebots.  Another may be just a
difference in culture -- robots are considered far more important to the
Japanese in general than they are to us in the U.S.

These two observations are probably linked -- humanoid robotics is
expensive, and so to be a viable hobby it needs a big enough segment of
the population that thinks dropping $2K or more on a robot is a
worthwhile thing to do.

Still, I see a lot of progress being made -- performance is going up and
price is coming down, at least among the commercially available kits.  
In hobby robotics, you're right -- it doesn't seem like most of us are
doing things we couldn't have done 30 years ago (though we're probably
doing them far more quickly and cheaply).

Best,
- Joe

     We're still mostly seeing dumb sensing and reactive control, even
though we now have low-cost hardware and sensors and can do better.
Take a look at papers on "simultaneous localization and mapping"
from the last few years.  The theory, at last, works.

     The hardware base needed for that is an R/C car with stereo
webcams, wheel encoders, a good yaw gyro, compass, accelerometers,
some short-range IR sensors, a few hundred MIPS on board, and a
WiFi link, for maybe $400.  That would be usable by software
developers without building hardware.

     As far as I know, you still can't buy anything like that off the
shelf.  If you try to build it, you'll waste too much time doing
things like getting two webcams to play nicely together as a stereo pair,
getting the things mounted so they're rigidly aligned properly,
dealing with Linux or Windows drivers that don't handle multiple
cameras well, and trying to debug stereo camera alignment software.

     Something like the Point Grey Bumblebee stereo camera, which is just
two camera chips on one board in one case with two lenses, is needed,
but at something like ordinary webcam-level pricing.


     What's interesting is that the Japanese hobbyist robots are merging remote
control and autonomy.  You can't usefully control 22 degrees of freedom
with a remote control box.  Those little humanoid combat robots are
acquiring sensors, rate gyros and balance reflexes.  But they're still
under-sensored out of the box.

     At that level, what's needed for autonomy is a RoboNova, Bioloid,
or Kondo humanoid platform, with a 6DOF inertial unit, stereo webcams,
a WiFi link, force sensors on hands and feet, and force feedback from
all servos, as a commercial product.  Then the hardware is a solved problem,
and people who only want to do software can start developing for the thing.
I expect we'll see that from Japan in about two years.


     That's what's discouraging.  I did the R/C car thing with a New Micros
Forth CPU and a sonar on an R/C servo back in 1986.  Back when the IBM
PC/AT was a state of the art desktop computer.  It's been twenty years,
and computers have made some progress since then.  Hobbyist robots have
not advanced accordingly.

                    John Nagle

In other words, if you want a robot with stuff that works,
you can't buy it off the shelf -- instead, you will have to
build it yourself and spend a bunch of time debugging it all.
Yup, that sounds like the state of amateur robotics to me.
It sure is what I spend all my robotics time doing.


I'd love to see it.  I think it is *much* harder than you think.


There has been some progress, but not much.  System integration
is hard, and most people want to get paid to do it.

Let me know if you ever decide to go out to the garage
and build an interesting amateur robot; I would love to
see it.  By the way, I *do* consider Overbot interesting,
I just have a hard time classifying it as an amateur effort.

-Wayne

It seems to me that the real problem in building/creating these more
advanced robots is time. Probably most people who have an interest in
robotics are working full time jobs and don't have enough time to
finish these projects in a timely manner. These robots from Japan are
built/engineered by 'teams' of people all with the same goal. Well the
same for robots made in America also. We all have the same technology
and knowledge available to us.

So, we need more teamwork. We need places were we can work on these
projects together. Every person that is participating on particular
project gives that much more time to the initiative. It is not solely
a software or hardware problem.

Whatever its worth; that is my opinion,
Joe McKibben