this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2023
125 points (95.6% liked)
Technology
58180 readers
3996 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's not much of a robot if it requires a person pumping air into it to move. That's like saying a bike is a robot, as long as you've got someone pedaling.
It's actually the perfect metaphor for all the AI hype.
I think in this context (particularly with a very quick skim of the paper for some additional context), it it might be more helpful to think of air "powering" this design in the same way that electricity "powers" things. The focus isn't on the energy source, it's on the structural design of the "robot" itself.
Consider it another way: if their system/model/whatever designed a conventional electrically-powered robot without also designing an electrical generator or batteries etc, would you still discount it as "not being a robot"? The problem might be in our expectation based on the language being used. I might also be full of crap haha, but hopefully that's another perspective to consider.