MIT AGI: Boston Dynamics [video]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LiNSPRKHyvo

by AlanTuring • 8 years ago

222 56 8 years ago

suyash• 8 years ago

Thanks for sharing this wonderful lecture. I would like to know why this guy's mission is to have Robotic Intelligence >= Human Intelligence. What is his reason behind that, he did not divulge. Any guesses?

aje403• 8 years ago

What's there to question? You're making assumptions by even asking his motives. Are you implying he should not be doing this ethically or something? Von Neumann responded to a quote from Oppenheimer lamenting the invention of the bomb: "Some people confess to the sin to take credit for it"

rogeroga• 8 years ago

that is a great quote, indeed that happens at all levels, sounds like a cover up for false modesty.

joe_the_user• 8 years ago

I skimmed the lecture after first ten minutes and as far as I can tell, while it seemed like it would be interesting to someone interested in what Boston Dynamics was doing, it doesn't really say anything about AGI beyond "we eventually want to do AGI and we think doing robot stuff well will get us there." If there's something I missed, could someone say.

Since this is part of an MIT lecture series on AGI, I think the GP is sort-of justified in also asking where that part is.

dwc3• 8 years ago

Pretty much every conception of AGI is of greater than human intelligence, at least in some aspects.

The reason? Otherwise why build it? Yes, there are cases where AGI as subhuman-level intelligence would have utility, but the remaining cases are far more numerous and have far more utility.

goatlover4• 8 years ago

but the remaining cases are far more numerous and have far more utility

But why do we want to replace ourselves? Do we just want the machines to do everything for us? Take care of us like we're pets?

gowld• 8 years ago

There are multiple dimensions to scaling. A large number of subhuman-intelligent agents can beat a small number of superhuman-intelligences (and vice versa, depending on specifics), and certainly beats not building anything.

blhack• 8 years ago

There is a value to human life beyond just "how smart you are".

Otherwise why build it?

Because it would be better to send robots into dangerous situations that it is to send human beings.

gonehome3• 8 years ago

Not sure why you're being downvoted for bringing up a valid point. Though I'd argue the reason is more that stopping at human level is a hard optimization to hit.

Once there's a way to train a general intelligence it's likely hard to contain the improvement - that's why the goal alignment problem is important. Even the current human architecture running at a billion operations per second instead of its current 100 or so would be a problem.

Human general intelligence is constrained by things like power consumption available via eating or needing a head that can fit out of a birth canal - AGI constraints are a lot less limiting and AGI can improve faster.

derefr2• 8 years ago

A target of exactly-human intelligence is potentially useful for automating All The Jobs and entering a post-scarcity era without also starting an AI singularity.

Though many approaches to “exactly-human intelligence” would just result in humans that happen to be robots, and we probably don’t want that, especially if the point is to make them do all our work for us.

I don’t know how to refer specifically to the alternative, though—an intelligence that can solve “human-hard” problems, without needing anything like sentience or self-determined goals/desires that would push it toward wanting things orthogonal to its designed purpose. Human-adjacent AGI? Human-competitive Tool AI?

kowdermeister• 8 years ago

Possibly to make the world a better place.

goatlover4• 8 years ago

For the shareholders.

rojobuffalo• 8 years ago

When you specify that the robot should open the door, and then a human interferes, how do you ensure the robot doesn't yank the door abruptly to knock the human back or swing its arm into the human to clear that space?

lainga• 8 years ago

Give all the humans robot arms. Rules of nature, Jack!

fladrif• 8 years ago

Asimov's three rules of robotics? Are those being implemented?

zaroth2• 8 years ago

Marc actually discusses how safety is extremely challenging, e.g. people assume you can just have the robot freeze, but often freezing can cause more harm.

So for now they actually do not let the robots operate in physical contact with humans. The closest they’ve come to testing the robots is working with a human to lift a stretcher.

See: T=37:50

arde• 8 years ago

Stephen Wolfram says they're impossible: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7kX7BuHSFI&t=4387

TeMPOraL• 8 years ago

The whole point of Asimov's three rules of robotics was to discuss how they make no sense in the real world, as the problem domain is too hard to be reduced like that.

jlebrech2• 8 years ago

i'm sure darwin's law also applies.

emilga• 8 years ago

Very cool lecture!

It would be interesting to hear him speak about the pros and cons of different body plans. Are three or six legged robots useful, compared to four legged ones? What about multi-armed humanoid robots?

zaroth2• 8 years ago

Someone asked that question and he kinda punted on the answer. He said humanoid robots are theoretically useful for operating in spaces designed for humans, and also get orders of magnitude better responses from the public, but spreading out the motors and balancing tech in a quadruped gives much more space to work in.

See: T=46min

mooneater• 8 years ago

Interesting:

- mentions military application without further comment, then dwells on elder care

- 21:05 robotics platform like "the android of robotics"

- 38:50 struggling with safety

- 48:00 "Im sure we will use learning before too long" Im surprised they arent using a lot of machine learning here.

dirtshell• 8 years ago

For the vast majority of robotics and controls traditional methods often have the best (implementation + research)/time value. Using any kind of machine learning usually means a lot of research and implementation time for widely varying results. Maybe if you had some ML specialists that could accelerate implementation and direct you on the right path, ML approaches could become more popular.

The simplest and most practical use of ML is in CV. I'd be surprised if they weren't doing some of that.

Iv• 8 years ago

They aren't. You see QR code everywhere. I feel they are at the point I was before going into deep learning: they recognized the buzz pattern of an overhyped tech and won't believe it provides immediate gain until they try.

CamperBob2• 8 years ago

The video also pairs well with the penultimate Black Mirror episode in the latest season (S4E5, "Metalhead").

xchip• 8 years ago

Nice tiled floor, I guess that helps a bit with SLAM (just being jealous, great job!! :) )

lopmotr• 8 years ago

It's excellent that they've got large scale practical commercial applications in mind, rather than the niche search and rescue which every university robot researcher seems to talk about as their imagined application.

soheil• 8 years ago

Unfortunately, the above is the best available resolution of slides. Thanks for understanding. We're always learning and improving.

Hmm something doesn't sit right with me on this one. It's not just slides, it's videos too. It seems like they're apologizing for a mistake they might have made as opposed to intentionally downscaled the videos. Is it just a coincidence that the first time some of these videos are shown (not all) they happen to be extremely low res?

iandanforth2• 8 years ago

The best thing about Boston Dynamics is that their robots don't work. Maybe spot-mini will but their track record is terrible and I'm thankful for it. I get the distinct impression that these self described 'badboys' would happily hand over a fully functional android to the military complete with gun mounts. There are a lot of great robotics companies to work for that are also deeply principled about doing good, this is not one of them.

thematt• 8 years ago

Why do you say they don't work? The videos seem impressive.

hitekker• 8 years ago

The GP works at an indirect competitor to Boston Dynamics.

Since the invective lacks suevidence, we can assume it is based upon resentment and/or jealousy, i.e., “how dare their unweaponized, prototype tech be light-years ahead of our own tech! They’re unprincipled!”

richard___• 8 years ago

Examples of such companies?

abrichr• 8 years ago

Kindred.ai

jlebrech2• 8 years ago

what's evil about the military?

GenericsMotors2• 8 years ago

There's definitely something evil (extremely unethical?) about handing the decision/burden to take someone's life to machines.

Also, I don't think your remark is a fair representation of the parent comment.

wmeredith• 8 years ago

“Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement. We pay for a single fighter with a half-million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people. . . . This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron”

-Dwight D. Eisenhower

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chance_for_Peace_speech

eli_gottlieb• 8 years ago

Please see: past 15 years of nonstop war and corruption that hasn't done any good for anyone.

lesss365• 8 years ago

Weren't they getting funds from DARPA?

mark_l_watson• 8 years ago

I recommend the entire MIT course on AGI http://AGI.mit.edu

Great guest lecturers.

MIT AGI: Boston Dynamics [video]

Related Stories