Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pt.cs.cmu.edu!cive.ri.cmu.edu!gerry
From: gerry@cive.ri.cmu.edu (Gerry Roston)
Newsgroups: comp.robotics
Subject: Re: Designing for robots, (was a flame fest)
Message-ID: <9956@pt.cs.cmu.edu>
Date: 19 Jul 90 15:15:06 GMT
References: <10518@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu> <#*S$G+&@ads.com> <848@sagpd1.UUCP> <$}T$X6&@ads.com> <138873@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <9934@pt.cs.cmu.edu> <139060@sun.Eng.Sun.COM> <18653@ttidca.TTI.COM>
Distribution: comp
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, CS/RI
Lines: 30

In article <18653@ttidca.TTI.COM> hollombe@ttidca.TTI.COM (The Polymath) writes:
>One of the first things I noticed was that parts of the ATM aren't well
>designed for people, let alone robots.  Not surprisingly, those are the
>parts that are giving the robot the most trouble. 
> ...
>The one part that was designed specifically to be easy for people (the
>touchscreen) is the part that gives the robot the least trouble.


In the above statement, Jerry SEEMS to be implying that tasks
which humans can do easily are tasks which robots can do easily.
I do not agree with this. A task which we all face every day is
opening a doorequipped with a door knob).  For a robot to 
accomplish this task is quite difficult.  It is probably true,
however, that there is some subset of tasks which both humans
and robots can handle easily.  

I agree strongly with Jerry's comments about the construction of 
the space station (although as you are all aware, I am NOT a
proponent of said structure!).  To strengthen his comments, a
study should be done to determine which tasks fall into the 
catagory of being easy for both humans and robots.  Then, given
the choice of construction techniques, those tasks which fall
into this catagory would be the preferred ones for space applications.

-- 
gerry roston, field robotics center
robotics institute, carnegie mellon university
pittsburgh, pennsylvania, 15213  (412) 268-6557
gerry@cive.ri.cmu.edu