Quote:
Originally posted by tw
Robots cannot improvise? Who is still living in the early 20th Century? Then I guess that Martian rover is still stuck on the platform - obstructed by air bags. Then I guess those Honda robots do not play soccer.
Man on scene is really not necessary since man still needs his robots. Man cannot see the many frequencies that his robots see. Man cannot measure fundamental science paramaters without his robots. Called scientific equipment when in the man's hand. Man not longer does so much advanced work - such as the human genome project made possbile only because robots did the work.
|
It seems that you and I are operating with differing definitions on the term "robot." I'm referring to a programmable automaton, where your defintiion seems to include any technological tool, such as a desktop computer, infrared imaging systems, etc. To me, if it's not automated, if it requires human input to be useful, it's a "tool," not a "robot."
Robots as they exist today cannot improvise, because improvisation requires intelligence and creativity. A robot can
appear to improvise, but one of two things is really happening... A) It is behaving as it was pre-programmed to do in a situation which was anticipated, or B) A human controller intervened and improvised on behalf of the robot. Such intervention is possible on Mars missions, though slow (takes 3-4 minutes each way to transmit data between Earth and Mars), so if something requires a quick reaction, and the robot doesn't have suitable pre-programming to react appropriately, the robot fails. At even greater distances, that communication latency becomes more and more problematic. A lot can happen during that delay.
One day, we may possess the technology to grant artifical intelligence and creativity to machines, enough that they really can improvise and make problem-solving decisions on faraway planets without human intervention. But by that time, the intelligent entitiy embodied by the robot would be a unique, valuable being, and we'd have no more right risking it's existence than we do risking human lives, so we have the same problem.
I'm not saying that we need to go to Mars NOW, but soon. Some people will never be satisfied with the risk, or with the price tag, but there are a lot of such people at the cusp of every major effort in history, and those people with the determination continue the effort despite them. I don't even particularly like Dubya, but I happen to agree with him that putting men on Mars is a worthwhile goal.