Cafe opens in Tokyo staffed by robots controlled by paralyzed people

https://soranews24.com/2018/11/29/cafe-opens-in-tokyo-staffed-by-robots-controlled-by-paralyzed-people/

by mpweiher • 8 years ago

559 132 8 years ago

alias_neo• 8 years ago

This is fantastic. Although I'm currently unable to watch the videos, I'm hoping that the people controlling the robots have various forms of feedback so that the interactions can give them some much needed human contact.

If they do open a permanent cafe of this type I'll be sure to visit next time I'm in the area.

chrischen• 8 years ago

They appear to have a video monitor with a camera feed from the robot, but I can’t figure out how they actually control the robot and how responsive it is.

pmx• 8 years ago

The example i saw had a woman who had control of her eyes but nothing else. She had a computer monitor with eye tracking software installed. She could look at controls on the screen in order to command the robot. This was all overlayed on a live video feed from the robot. I'm assuming she also had sound since people were telling the robot verbally what their order was.

dpflan• 8 years ago

This is fascinating! If you're interested in some of research on neurotechnologies (e.g. BCI-controlled robots/robotic limbs), check out the BrainGate research group: https://www.braingate.org/

b_tterc_p• 8 years ago

This is a great concept. It does feel weird though that it’s tied to an anime... I can’t tell why exactly this exists. Is it a venture into much needed independence for paralyzed people? Or... is it horribly distasteful advertising that will soon be taken away?

antepodius2• 8 years ago

Could easily be both. Turning a profit by making use of people who were previously less useful? It's a capitalist's dream.

hiccuphippo• 8 years ago

And in exchange make them useful and able to gain a wage themselves.

opencl• 8 years ago

I highly doubt that advertising a 10 year old anime would be very profitable. If anything it's an ad for the robots. The robots designed specifically to help disabled people.

Two of the three cofounders of the company were bedridden for long periods of time due to illness and wanted to help people in similar situations. They also employ several physically disabled people as remote workers.

It won't soon be taken away though, it already shut down. It was intended as a short pilot run. They plan to partner with some existing restaurants for the same sort of thing on a more permanent basis starting next year.

canada_dry• 8 years ago

I imagine this could work with other jobs where disabled humans could augment a robot/drone e.g. security guard, house sitting.

But - of course - the human interaction component is probably the most fulfilling for the operator.

thinkingemote• 8 years ago

Let's replace self driving cars with remotely controlled chauffeurs.

sigfubar• 8 years ago

Straight out of the John Scalzi novel! Our science fiction writers need to adjust to the quickening pace at which their ideas are turned into reality.

sempron64• 8 years ago

For those wondering which novel: John Scalzi's Lock In. I enjoyed it, though I generally find his work hit-and-miss. It' s a detective story set in the near future where a significant percentage of the population is paralyzed due to a pandemic. The paralyzed operate in society by using android avatars.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lock_In

GrifMD• 8 years ago

I enjoyed the book and the premise is interesting, but there was just something missing that made it truly good. (I know this is the worst book report ever)

tsimionescu• 8 years ago

On the one hand, giving disabled people some activity that helps them be independent and care for themselves sounds great!

On the other hand, the idea that this could become a weapon against disabled people (why are you staying on benefits? go out and get a job for yourself, you lazy paraplegic!) is... scary.

Especially given that it sounds mostly like a marketing gimmick, and that the very thing allowing them to interact with the world is not their own, but property of the store owners - i.e. they can't take the robot and move to a different caffe, they are tied to the benevolence of their boss.

Overall, this is much more distopic than utopic, and should be discouraged in this form; but the technology is interesting and could be an asset in the lives of many people.

MordodeMaru• 8 years ago

I guess special regulation is required. After all, there isn't a huge market for paralyzed people out there, thus the cost of opportunity of changing jobs is small anyway. I see your point though but disagree with the dystopian tag: if there is any chance to free mentally healthy but physically paralyzed people it is through robotics and technology.

whatshisface4• 8 years ago

On the other hand, the idea that this could become a weapon against disabled people (why are you staying on benefits? go out and get a job for yourself, you lazy paraplegic!) is... scary.

This one restaurant can't employ more than a tiny fraction of paraplegics, so I doubt that will happen. Sure, irrational people could use that argument, but irrational people can already use a lot of irrational arguments. If remote operation of drones by paraplegics suddenly becomes a major part of society, so that operations like this restaurant would be a significant part of the policy debate, paraplegics would be better off and potentially not need benefits. Wouldn't that be an ideal goal?

claudiawerner4• 8 years ago

It depends on the nature of the work as to whether it is an ideal goal or not. If it is dehumanizing work, or perhaps even the fate of a paraplegic child to have their only career option being a "robot waiter" in a cafe, maybe there's a problem with that. Being "better off" is not only measured in terms of having wealth or a stable place to live (indeed with the same argument one could argue that slavery is justified because the slaves are "better off" living under a master rather than dying on the streets), it is also measured in life choice freedom and happiness.

What of paraplegics as restaurant managers, for instance? A related point from the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy page on Affirmative Action[0]:

Many factories and businesses prior to 1964, especially in the South, had in place overtly discriminatory policies and rules. For example, a company’s policy might have openly relegated African-Americans to the maintenance department and channeled whites into operations, sales, and management departments, where the pay and opportunities for advancement were far better. If, after passage of the Civil Rights Act, the company willingly abandoned its openly segregative policy, it could still carry forward the effects of its past segregation through other already-existing facially neutral rules. For example, a company policy that required workers to give up their seniority in one department if they transferred to another would have locked in place older African-American maintenance workers as effectively as the company’s own prior segregative rule that made them ineligible to transfer at all. Consequently, courts began striking down facially neutral rules that carried through the effects of an employer’s past discrimination, regardless of the original intent or provenance of the rules.

[0] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/affirmative-action/

theoh2• 8 years ago

As someone who has experienced it, I believe that the neoliberal concept of "workfare" and the related idea that just any job is good for the disabled is something we need to be really careful about. This isn't just a "late capitalism" thing, it's a historical problem where, for example, the mentally ill have been expected to work as gardeners at the institution which houses them, whether or not this is a fulfilling job for them. It goes back to the idea of the workhouse and beyond.

One crucial issue is that the person who is being asked to do the work needs to feel that they can say no.

Finding ways to extract labour from people who would otherwise be a "pure burden" on society is obviously fraught with risks of exploitation.

thiago_fm2• 8 years ago

Hard work is important in the japanese culture. The thought above, mostly western, if you pardon me, has no value there.

hopler4• 8 years ago

looking busy is important in Japanesd culture. Japanese salarymen sit all day at makework jobs that are essentially privatized welfare with lifetime commitment.

philbarr2• 8 years ago

the idea that this could become a weapon against disabled people

Possibly you're taking it a bit far there, but at least in England I could see that being the case. The lengths they go to to stop people getting benefits are ridiculous.

For example, Scotland now has devolved powers for benefits, and are being much more generous: Having a baby? Here's £300. Is it your first? Here's another £300. Twins? Another £300. Then they make sure you can apply for all this online.

In England they tried not to have an online presence because, "we don't want to make it too easy for people to apply."

ocharles2• 8 years ago

In England they tried not to have an online presence because, "we don't want to make it too easy for people to apply."

Source?

donkeyd2• 8 years ago

they are tied to the benevolence of their boss

If they get a contract, in most countries they'd just be remote workers with the same rights as any other worker. At many desk jobs, the employer can just lock your account and stop you from doing anything. Even a computer can do that these days. [0]

[0] https://idiallo.com/blog/when-a-machine-fired-me

L-four• 8 years ago

Most disabled people on benefits want to work but for obvious reasons cannot or are not given opportunities too. If it were easy for them to work they would be lazy for not doing it.

pjc50• 8 years ago

weapon against disabled people (why are you staying on benefits? go out and get a job for yourself, you lazy paraplegic!)

As the sibling comment indicates about the UK, there's no reason why the benefits system or politics thereof has to have any connection with the reality of what disabled people can and cannot do.

The UK system has been restructured around "prove you cannot", with the interpretation of "can do occasionally with extreme effort" as "can do for a 40 hour workweek with no assistance". Many of these absurd judgements are overturned on appeal, but the goal is to discourage as many people as possible not save money or minimise bureaucracy.

diminoten• 8 years ago

But like, if society can produce an abundance of jobs that disabled people can actually do safely and happily, why not push them to take those jobs?

Nothing scary about that, though if we get good enough at building interfaces for robots like this, the scary part could be how everyone ends up working "remotely" and we find ourselves in a WALL-E like chair all day...

nihonde• 8 years ago

Fair point, but Japan has a pretty commendable culture of including and enabling people with physical disabilities. I once encountered a large group of Haneda airport employees participating in an exercise where each of them had adopted a different disability (one in a wheelchair, another blindfolded, another with crutches, etc) and the group was methodically navigating every centimeter of the airport with a separate team taking notes.

hopler4• 8 years ago

California has lawyers doing the same thing at businesses across the state, and suing accessibility-law violators. Sadly, it's more of an extortion racket using the letter of law as a weapon than a vehicle for improving access.

gamerDude• 8 years ago

While yes, this could go to a distopic place, it also creates opportunity for disabled people. Let's say you get a job as a robot waiter where before you couldn't get that job. You then start to learn the restaurant industry and start helping out with process or management. And then you are qualified to become a restaurant manager, owner, franchisee, etc. For any restaurant.

wongarsu• 8 years ago

i.e. they can't take the robot and move to a different caffe, they are tied to the benevolence of their boss

The same can be said about a lot of jobs. If your quit your job in a metal working shop you can't take your lathe with you, it belongs to your employer. A bus driver usually can't take the bus with him. A crane operator usually doesn't own the crane. The only thing different in this situation is that there is only one such cafe equipped with remote controled servers. But that just means we should encourage such cafes so that more spring up and workers can move to another employer with similar equipment.

On the other hand, the idea that this could become a weapon against disabled people (why are you staying on benefits? go out and get a job for yourself, you lazy paraplegic!)

If there were enough job opportunities for disabled people, this "attack" would be entirely valid reasoning. After all they get benefits mostly because they can't participate in the job market in the same way other people can. In the reality we live in those job opportunities don't exist in sufficient quantity, so any such attacks are empty rhetoric.

Overall, this is much more distopic than utopic

Giving disabled people a more normal life, enabling them to participate more in society, is distopic? Even ignoring any financial aspects and the interaction during the work day, just working in itself is shown to have positive effects on mental health.

sigstoat• 8 years ago

they can't take the robot and move to a different caffe

taking on the risk of owning an expensive bit of capital equipment that moves, requires maintenance and is put into use at an employer's facility doesn't sound like a fiscally sound idea for someone who has difficulties leaving their home.

tossaccount123• 8 years ago

wow, using technology to increase productivity to make up for stable population rather than importing millions of people who will be out of jobs due to technological advances in a few years. Truly a game changing strategy

claudiawerner4• 8 years ago

It's strange how these discussions are framed in terms of the dehumanizing "importing people". Maybe it's a reflection in the minds of those who say it of the idea that people are only means to an end, commodities to be imported and exported.

hopler4• 8 years ago

That doesn't make sense. If productivity increase is inevitable, it's not a game changer strategy. If technology increases human productivity, then immigrants won't be unemployed in a few years, consumers will be wealthier.

somebodythere• 8 years ago

Consumers will be wealthier only if the productivity gains from automation end up in consumers' wallets--and because employment is the main way that money gets into consumers' wallets, this is not a given.

airstrike3• 8 years ago

Where exactly do you intend to fit all of those immigrants in one of the world's most densely populated countries?

And the jury is still out on if, when and how many people will be unemployed due to technical advances.

aeontech• 8 years ago

Japan’s local governments are trying to give away millions of abandoned houses: https://www.travelandleisure.com/travel-news/japan-free-aban...

Similarly to rural Italy, France, Spain and USA, as people move to urban centers, rural population falls and small towns die. Japan’s demographic situation makes their case extra difficult at the moment.

jplayer012• 8 years ago

Japan doesn't have any obligation to enable more immigration and give everybody jobs.

bregma• 8 years ago

Robots are autonomous mechanisms. These are waldoes. Not to belittle the purpose and sentiment (and kudos to the effort to better enabling those with physical restrictions), but an androideqsue waldo is just not a robot.

drugme• 8 years ago

It's a news article, after all -- and fundamentally more about, you know, people rather than technology. So in that sense the distinction hardly matters.

hombre_fatal• 8 years ago

I bet you couldn't find a single person on the street that is aware of that distinction if you went out right now and asked 100 of them.

"Cafe opens in Tokyo staffed by waldos..." is a complete regression to me, though I suppose I'd click the headline just to find out what the hell a waldo is.

JTon• 8 years ago

Ackchyually... ;)

I never heard the term Waldo before. For those who are interested, more info here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remote_manipulator

jimmydddd2• 8 years ago

https://laughing-stalk.blogspot.com/2016/12/an-open-letter-t...

claudiawerner4• 8 years ago

No, you're right, Well Actually Guy. It's not just used by emotional abusers. It's also used by socially tone deaf people who seek to belittle the experiences of others in order to score debate points, or force their way into a discussion that has absolutely nothing to do with them.

This seems much too assuming; sometimes technicalities are important to a good discussion, and of course this ties into the concept of sealioning[0] too, but revealing sealioning is a better tool to use against such people. Sealioning is where people don't recognise that you don't want to debate everything, so they continue to pester you. But once committed to a discussion, the tools of skepticism, doubt and rigor are all very useful. They may be useful (within some margin some of us might find agreeable or disagreeable) on a site almost expressly for interesting perspectives - Hacker News.

Often I'm happy that there's a "well actually" guy to provide nuance where it might be needed. Maybe it's not needed, but often it is. There is a time and place, and many of the author's examples are examples of the wrong time and place to "well actually". It doesn't mean the points are wrong.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning

erikpukinskis• 8 years ago

It seems like most actual robots and waldos would contain the other. These waldos presumably have many autonomous mechanisms, for not bumping into each other, not dropping things, wayfinding, etc.

And the robots at a car factory are monitored and frequently reprogrammed, stopped and started, etc by humans. So in many respects they are a waldo.

How do you draw the line? Is it by percentage of mechanisms? Or frequency of human input?

codeulike• 8 years ago

Language is open source

hcs• 8 years ago

Congrats, you found the waldo in this story! On to the next one...

matt_morgan• 8 years ago

I always thought this is how we should clean our houses (when we pay other people to clean our houses). Robovacs are great for smoothish floors, but most other cleaning tasks are too complicated for autonomous robots. With a good humanoid robot controlled by someone living anywhere, it would be easier.

kwhitefoot• 8 years ago

Why not employ a human being directly?

mikepurvis2• 8 years ago

Then that human being has to actually travel to your house and do the entire job start to finish. The idea of a robot vac (or similar) that can do 80% of the job itself but ask for help from a trusted operator over the internet is really interesting.

dsfyu404ed• 8 years ago

Expensive in most of the developed world, possibly higher risk and less reliable depending on the specifics of the employer and employee(s) in question.

donkeyd2• 8 years ago

I don't really understand why, but the idea of somebody sitting behind a computer somewhere, controlling my vacuum is just really weird and unsettling. I also understand that this could help handicapped people or people in less fortunate countries earn a decent wage, but then again, it feels odd. Also, paying for a vacuum and then paying a fee to the person using it feels weird... Even though hiring a cleaning lady is pretty much the same thing.

Thanks for this, now I'll be thinking about this all day. And I'll probably have intense discussions with people about the ethics and their feelings toward this idea at parties... Because I know I'll bring it up.

dpau2• 8 years ago

I feel the same unease. In China, blind people are often given jobs as piano tuners and masseuses. In a country with few resources and opportunities for disabled people, I first viewed these types of jobs positively. However, people can be pressured or even forced into taking on these careers in order to be less of a burden on their families.

corpMaverick2• 8 years ago

I don't really understand why, but the idea of somebody sitting behind a computer somewhere, controlling my vacuum is just really weird and unsettling.

Understandable. But if there is a good value proposition many people could probably get over that.

BurningFrog3• 8 years ago

Make it so the vacuum camera can only be aimed at the floor, and 95% of my problems are gone.

bonestamp2• 8 years ago

It does seem unsettling to have a high tech cleaning robot that is simply an extension of a person. Privacy aside, I think it might be because it seems like kind of a waste of all that technology. I would feel less uneasy if it weren't a 1:1 relationship and the robot could do some of the work without a human controlling it.

For example, maybe the human trains the robot so the robot can do some of the work itself and the human just fills in the more difficult work or the work that is never the same. For example, it would probably be hard to train a robot to put away clothes and toys in my kid's rooms, we'll get there eventually of course, but a human could do that part of it and then they could trigger the vacuum to run when they're done with the hard stuff. The human would also need to be "on call" to sort out a problem when the robot gets stuck or can't perform a task.

corpMaverick2• 8 years ago

Interestingly. You could remotely train a robot. Which things go where. After that the robot could do a lot on its own. And you could remotely manage a fleet of robots.

airstrike3• 8 years ago

Cue NieR Automata

clashmoore• 8 years ago

Instead of at the consumer level, I can see this being viable at a commercial level. Robot vacuums and floor cleaners that clean office and retail building surfaces controlled by those who are not physically able to do so.

vkou2• 8 years ago

With the current state of robotics, a robot would either be incapable of cleaning my apartment, or would be capable of doing serious damage to it, or, realistically, both.

Maybe in a few decades, but right now, the last thing I want is an ai-controlled, or remote-controlled robot that is capable of scrubbing tile and cleaning caulking, moving my crap around, and wiping down hard-to-reach surfaces inside my apartment.

Unlike humans, if it is using too much force for the task at hand, it will have no awareness that it's likely to cause damage.

The hard part of cleaning isn't pushing a vacuum cleaner around.

scarejunba• 8 years ago

Wait, how would a roomba seriously damage your home? Just curious because I’ve never thought mine could but maybe it could.

SonnyWortzik• 8 years ago

My vision of the future for the cleaning service industry:

Robot at home on stand by a la I,Robot movie

:"Good morning Mr. Anderson, our remote cleaning specialist is ready to clean your home, do you comply?"

pass code confirmation needed

:"Thank you, our services will take approximately 45 minutes. Please stand clear while we complete our task. Thank you Mr. Anderson. Have a Wonderful day!"

:"Please note that your next remote cleaning will require a renewal of your service agreement. Please take time to fill in the survey, confirm your subscription, and adjust your cleaning times, and thank you again for being a valued customer here at CleanTech"

LOL day dreaming is fun.

calbear81• 8 years ago

What if we took it to the next level and made it a game where two players compete to clean the most debris via remote controlled vacuum cleaners. A map would show areas cleaned and point values.

taneq4• 8 years ago

You're saying service robots will be Ubik-uitous?

mavdi• 8 years ago

Christ, that second video is Black Mirror AF.

cjdell• 8 years ago

As well intentioned as this may be, I get the feeling this might be the first step to a world like the one depicted in the movie "Surrogates".

AlanSE• 8 years ago

The concept of that movie was really insightful, but the trailer looked kind of terrible. Was there any Ghost In The Shell kind of deep philosophy, or was it just a Hollywood excuse to blow things up and do completely unrealistic action scenes?

Symmetry• 8 years ago

Ship Who Sang here we come.

tkubacki• 8 years ago

For me even better idea would be to create coffe&chat type of Cafe. When real people can talk with other real people, though via robotic interface (contrary to human controlled robotic waiters which can be replaced with AI controlled robotic waiters at some point).

jbhatab• 8 years ago

Most positive and inspired startup concept I've seen in a while. Serious props to the founders for pushing boundaries with this.

loosetypes• 8 years ago

This case sounds like a positive

But it’s a bit scary that the telecommute, which maybe hasn’t, I think, caught on - at least as a means to include in-demand, distributed “information” workers - might catch on at scale when purposed in a way that could physically exclude workers with “menial” jobs from the need to live locally.

abledon• 8 years ago

Starcraft dragoon anyone ?

blhack• 8 years ago

There is a charity that my family supports that works with developmentally disabled people. One of the interesting things I learned when I attended one of their fundraisers was that part of their mission was finding jobs that developmentally disabled people would excel at due to their disability.

For instance: the guy who takes the ticket at the theaters in my city (Phoenix) is often a DD person. I thought this was odd, until I made the connection that this is literally a partnership between that company an the charity I'm talking about.

Most punk kids will get bored at this job, be snarky, not want to do it, etc. But some people with certtain DDs actually really enjoy it. They get to talk to people, they feel useful instead of feeling like a burden, they get a paycheck, etc. And for the company (harkins theaters) they get a happy, competent employee that enjoys their job.

It's a win win. And it's a perfect example of embracing the concept of "differently abled" instead of disabled. Made me really happy to learn that.

confiscate• 8 years ago

great observation. I noticed the same phenomenon but did not know there is a back story

Rodeoclash• 8 years ago

Interesting. Your post reminded me of this story in Australia recently. While this man wasn't placed through a charity, he found a similar enjoyment in his job

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3869008/McDonald-s-...

Balgair2• 8 years ago

I once interviewed with a company in NC that only employed blind people (to manufacture reading glasses, of all things!). NC has a provision for sub-minimum wage payments for those with disabilities [0]. This is to encourage employers to hire those with disabilities and give them at least some form of a wage. Per the interviewing process, it really seemed to help a lot of disabled people have a life. Their jobs got them out of the house/care facility, interacting with other people, and gave them a purpose in life(however mundane). Though I declined the job, it was an incredible company and view into the day to day lives of disabled citizens and their struggles. More states should consider such provisions to see if they may work for their people.

[0] https://www.employmentlawhandbook.com/wage-and-hour-laws/sta...

raverbashing• 8 years ago

Would you happen to know in which part of the manufacturing process they worked?

wizardforhire• 8 years ago

My mom used to be an executive director that found work and provided housing for developmentally disabled adults. I remember the challenge they had finding jobs they could excel at. They got a contract with Hitachi to pack boxes, once they worked with the factory to delegate the work, which involved color coding the boxes and determine the packing order, it became one of the favorite jobs for individuals with more individuals wanting the job then there where positions. It was great for the lower functioning individuals who were not in a position to engage with others. The other jobs that got filled quickly were custodial for the higher functioning individuals.

antisthenes2• 8 years ago

Even Epsilons are useful. We couldn't do without Epsilons. Every one works for every one else.

justhelpingout2• 8 years ago

If we were creating them, then _Brave New World_ would be very applicable. But helping someone who has come to be through no intention of others accomplish good things in their life is good.

ianai• 8 years ago

I wish more shift work was done this way. There have got to be so many people working grueling hours and harming themselves otherwise needlessly.

cfqycwz• 8 years ago

I don't think this is just semantics—isn't this actually a cafe staffed by paralyzed people, who control robots? This headline is bit like saying a warehouse is staffed by forklifts, controlled by operators.

jplayer012• 8 years ago

This is about people being able to do the job from home. So no, this isn't the same thing.

kazinator• 8 years ago

They seem to have cooling fannies in their fannies. :)

known• 8 years ago

Shell Oil exclusively employs disabled people in India

srikanthkalin• 8 years ago

its one of the great thing keeping going guys

Cafe opens in Tokyo staffed by robots controlled by paralyzed people

Related Stories