Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!space
From: mcgeer%ji@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU (Rick McGeer)
Newsgroups: net.space
Subject: Re:  Future of Space Program
Message-ID: <8602100223.AA21702@ji.berkeley.edu>
Date: Sun, 9-Feb-86 21:23:33 EST
Article-I.D.: ji.8602100223.AA21702
Posted: Sun Feb  9 21:23:33 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 11-Feb-86 07:46:26 EST
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The ARPA Internet
Lines: 20

Well, why didn't you say so in the first place?  Actually, Paul, I've been
holding out on you a little; in some sense, it should be easier for robots
to work in space than on earth.  Since there's no atmospheric resistance or
gravity in orbit, the results of any action will be easy to calculate; and
since   (in general) the putative robot will be working in a vacuum, it
shouldn't have the earthbound robot's problem of the cluttered workbench.
Of course, there are other (more serious)  problems, some of them unique to
space.

Be of good cheer.  In general, teleoperators are going to make much more sense
in space than on earth.  Fortunately, I suspect that we're going to see a
revolution in teleoperators Real Soon Now.  DARPA's Strategic Computing
Initiative is trying to develop robot tanks.  Pretty soon, it's going to
dawn on those guys that AI just hasn't got it.  And then some other bright
laddy is going to point out to the DARPA folks that a teleoperated tank is
just as good as a robot tank, and then we'll have a big emphasis on real-time
programming, hard communications, and linkages -- which is what I think we
ought to be doing instead of wasting time and monay on AI...

					-- Rick.