| MIT Robot Walks On Water | Log
in/Create an Account | Top | 283 comments | Search Discussion |
|
|
| The Fine Print: The following comments are owned
by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any
way. |
Yes but... (Score:4, Funny)
by egg
troll (515396) on Monday August 25, @10:16PM (#6790465)
(http://www.microsoft.com/
| Last Journal: http://slashdot.org/~egg%20troll/journal/)
|
| Can it turn that water into wine? |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
Case of the Mondays (Score:3,
Informative)
by MhzJnky (443677) on
Monday August 25, @10:17PM (#6790479)
(http://www.waywardsun.com/)
|
| Slashdot had a case of the mondays and frogot itself
[slashdot.org] |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
Stick to it-ness. (Score:1,
Interesting)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday August
25, @10:17PM (#6790485)
|
| And yet they haven't made a robot that can walk up walls
like a gecko. |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
Eh?? (Score:2, Interesting)
by whereiswaldo
(459052) on Monday August 25, @10:18PM (#6790494)
(Last Journal: http://slashdot.org/~whereiswaldo/journal/)
|
It's no mystery why water spiders can walk on water. All
the engineers had to do was ask
these 3rd graders a question [harvard.edu].
|
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
- Re:Eh??
by reboot246 (Score:1) Monday August 25, @11:04PM
Re:Eh?? (Score:5, Informative)
by thelen (208445)
on Monday August 25, @10:28PM (#6790566)
(http://slashdot.org/)
|
|
The question is about propulsion, not
weight-to-surface tension ratios sufficient for
flotation. This research gives a better explanation of
the mechanism by which the water skimmers move with
such great efficiency (namely by created subsurface
vortices with their middle pair of legs) and puts to
rest the notion that it is attributable to the waves
themselves created by a rowing action.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
- Re:Eh??
by uradu (Score:3) Monday August 25, @11:25PM
- Re:Eh??
by extrasolar (Score:2) Tuesday August 26, @06:23AM
- Re:Eh??
by The Only Druid (Score:3) Tuesday August 26, @09:46AM
- Why
does it even matter? by HanzoSan (Score:1) Monday August 25,
@10:42PM
- Re:Why
does it even matter? by HanzoSan (Score:1) Monday August 25,
@10:57PM
Re:Why does it even
matter? (Score:5, Insightful)
by Austerity
Empowers (669817) on Tuesday August 26,
@12:48AM (#6791253)
|
It doesn't matter, I'd hire this person to the
exclusion of his peers at MIT. Why? It's creative,
I didn't think about it, and I can use someone
whose brain works like that.
I can hire
coders & designers easily. They're a dime a
dozen. I can hire GOOD -> excellent coders or
designers more difficultly by talking to friends
of friends etc, but they exist and are plentiful
enough. To hire someone that will build a
rediculous thing that no one has really seen
before, carry that design through to completion,
and make headlines...that person I'd pay a lot of
money to. He'll make me filthy rich if I'm nice to
him.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
- 1
reply beneath your current
threshold.
- Re:Why
does it even matter? by AntiOrganic (Score:3) Tuesday August
26, @12:51AM
- Re:Why
does it even matter? by tchristney (Score:1) Tuesday August
26, @11:29AM
- 1
reply beneath your current
threshold.
|
Point of note (Score:5, Interesting)
by NoTheory
(580275) on Monday August 25, @10:18PM (#6790495)
|
Actually there are several people who thing that MIT's
direction in AI has gone seriously awry. Marvin Minsky (though
somewhat stodgy), has pointed out that MIT's focus in robotics
is no longer on figuring out how to make things that do stuff
for people, but on subhuman gadgets.
So, yeah they may
be number one, but in a way, they've let down the old guard of
AI researchers.
Still, this is quite cool. |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
- Re:Point
of note by Dachannien (Score:3)
Monday August 25, @10:24PM
Re:Point of note (Score:5,
Insightful)
by dollargonzo
(519030) on Monday August 25, @10:30PM (#6790572)
(http://slashdot.org/)
|
problem is, minsky spends too much time debunking
good theory than creating new ones. let's take an
example. minsky proved that 2-layer neural networks
were not capable of generalizing to many tasks. the
proof is indeed notable, but then came *gasp* three
layer neural networks, and minsky's point was
irrelevant. i think he is just pissed that his ideas
were mostly abandoned by AI researchers.
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
- Re:Point
of note by timeOday (Score:2) Monday August 25, @10:45PM
- Re:Point
of note by lawpoop (Score:2) Monday August 25, @10:50PM
- 1
reply beneath your current
threshold.
- Re:Point
of note by cemaco (Score:1) Monday August 25, @11:38PM
- 1
reply beneath your current
threshold.
what's the research about
again? (Score:5, Interesting)
by jonbrewer
(11894) *
on Monday August 25, @11:47PM (#6791019)
(http://www.rock-chalk.com/)
|
several people who thing that MIT's direction
in AI has gone seriously awry
What does
this have to do with AI?
The research reported
on is primarily about fluid dynamics. Robostrider is a
catchy thing they've created to bring attention to the
important findings. In fact, seeing as the strider
[mit.edu] is powered by a rubber band, not only does
it not have anything to do with AI, it has nothing to
do with robotics either.
This doesn't mean it's
not wicked cool.
For more cool (without
downloading a video), check out david hu's beautiful
strider
pics [mit.edu].
|
| [ Reply
to This | Parent
] |
|
- Re:Point
of note by ashultz (Score:1) Tuesday August 26, @05:10PM
- Re:Point
of note by Plac3bo (Score:1) Monday August 25, @10:47PM
- 3
replies beneath your current
threshold.
|
Well, sure... (Score:5, Funny)
by Faust7
(314817) on Monday August 25, @10:19PM (#6790500)
(http://www.drgw.net/~project)
|
| If the water's polluted enough, anyone can walk on it.
|
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
I heard of this ages ago. (Score:1,
Informative)
by rokzy (687636) on Monday
August 25, @10:19PM (#6790501)
|
I think in the print edition of new scientist a couple of
weeks ago. ffs catch up.
robot news is boring. please
set up a robot category so I can filter it. |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
Sure number one in engineering...
(Score:2, Funny)
by Gortbusters.org
(637314) on Monday August 25, @10:20PM (#6790506)
(http://www.gortbusters.org/
| Last Journal: http://slashdot.org/~Gortbusters.org/journal/)
|
| but dead last in babe-filled orgies! |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
I predict... (Score:5, Funny)
by Anonvmous
Coward (589068) on Monday August 25, @10:21PM (#6790515)
|
| ... somebody will soon use the word 'overlords', and it
won't really be funny. |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
- I
for one ... by Hal The Computer (Score:1) Monday August 25,
@10:43PM
- 1
reply beneath your current
threshold.
- Re:I
predict... by The Munger (Score:1)
Monday August 25, @11:55PM
- Re:I
predict... by Lord_Dweomer (Score:2) Tuesday August 26,
@12:12AM
- 1
reply beneath your current
threshold.
|
MIT (Score:4, Insightful)
by Dachannien (617929)
on Monday August 25, @10:21PM (#6790522)
|
Yes, this particular research project is very
cool.
However, since it was mentioned in the original
post, I will say that USN&WR's rankings are flawed, and do
not necessarily reflect the quality of research taking place
at a particular institution. In fact, a significant portion of
their rankings are based on name recognition alone, which has
nothing to do with quality of research.
|
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
- Re:MIT
by Hal-9001 (Score:2) Monday August 25, @11:15PM
- 1
reply beneath your current
threshold.
|
Dupe (Score:5, Informative)
by Saeger
(456549) on Monday August 25, @10:22PM (#6790523)
(http://slashdot.org/ | Last
Journal: http://slashdot.org/~Saeger/journal/)
|
| This water
strider story [slashdot.org] was posted two weeks ago, but
because the way it was worded this time, the focus of the
posts will probably be on robots (and dupe flaming) rather
than the Christian Science Monitor being remarkably
unbiased. :)
-- |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
- Re:Dupe
by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Tuesday August 26, @01:42AM
- Re:Dupe
by Phroggy (Score:3) Tuesday August 26, @01:23PM
- Re:Dupe
by man_ls (Score:2) Monday August 25, @11:39PM
- Re:Dupe
by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday August 26, @12:18PM
- 1
reply beneath your current
threshold.
|
obJesus (Score:1)
by DChristensen
(98850) on Monday August 25, @10:23PM (#6790533)
(http://www.dwci.net/)
|
easy--they just know where the rocks are...
|
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
- 1
reply beneath your current
threshold.
|
Mirror (Score:2, Informative)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 25, @10:23PM
(#6790536)
|
| In case the site is slow, here's
[martin-studio.com] a mirror to the link in the article.
|
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
The real reason why (Score:5, Funny)
by Catharz
(223736) on Monday August 25, @10:30PM (#6790579)
|
MIT is number one in engineering.
Robostrider is
made out of a 7-Up can, stainless steel wire legs and an
elastic band coupled to a pulley to power its middle legs.
Too much 7-Up and not enough beer being consumed for
it to be a fair contest. They should increase their beer
consumption to that of other colleges and level the playing
field. |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
very pc of them (Score:5, Funny)
by jmarkantes (663024)
on Monday August 25, @10:32PM (#6790591)
|
Can't upset the censors
[mit.edu].
J
|
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
I wonder ... (Score:4, Funny)
by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 25, @10:39PM
(#6790641)
|
| If it can walk on water - does it run on linux? |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
Jeebus! (Score:1, Flamebait)
by Squidgee
(565373) <mailto:squidgeeOO1@ho%20t%20m%20a%20il.com>
on Monday August 25, @10:39PM (#6790642)
(http://lunenoire.blogspot.com/
| Last Journal: http://slashdot.org/~Squidgee/journal/)
|
| Holy crap! They made jeebus?! |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
correction.. (Score:3, Informative)
by linuxislandsucks
(461335) on Monday August 25, @10:40PM (#6790651)
(http://www.freeroller.net/page/shareme/Weblog
| Last Journal: http://slashdot.org/~linuxislandsucks/journal/)
|
The actual measure of the number one school engineering is
the school with the highest number of graduates as actual
astronauts serving with NASA..
That record past and
present is held by Purdue University...
|
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
I bet it walks on Charles river
(Score:5, Funny)
by meshko (413657) on
Monday August 25, @10:44PM (#6790676)
(http://www.scorch2000.com/)
|
| Charles river (the river that MIT stands on) is always
covered by a film of oil which is approximately one inch
thick. You don't have to be a freaking rocket scientist to
build a robot which walks on *that*. |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
3-link Swimmer (Score:3, Informative)
by frantzdb
(22281) on Monday August 25, @11:06PM (#6790809)
(http://www3.hmc.edu/~bfrantzdale)
|
| Just to save everyone the trouble, the third robot the
fluids lab appears to be working on is a 3-segment
swimmer [mit.edu]. |
| [ Reply
to This ] |
|
|
|
|
Censored photos of waterstrider sex?
(Score:4, Insightful)
by grinchmaster
(533271) on Monday August 25, @11:08PM (#6790817)
|
| On the linked page
http://www-math.mit.edu/%7Edhu/Striderweb/striderw
eb.html Someone has blotted out the intimate details of the
waterstriders mating ritual. Is he seriously worried about
offending someone, or is he worried about hosting a porn site?
Who says political correctness has gone wrong... This is just
pathetic. |
|
MIT Robot Walks
On Water
