Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

In Robot Soccer, US Team RoMeLa Dominates Robocup 2011

timothy posted about 3 years ago | from the robotic-hooligans-coming-next-year dept.

Robotics 60

Narmacil writes "U.S. Team RoMeLa has swept Robocup 2011, winning first place in both the kid size and teen size divisions. (Video) CHARLI, America's first full size autonomous humanoid, managed to also make the high score record for the teen size division. DARWIN, the kid-sized robot, beat the Darmstadt Dribblers, the previous world champs, and continued on to the finals to win out." There must be joy in Blacksburg today.

cancel ×

60 comments

I don't understand... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36712698)

I thought the U.S. sucked at science.

Re:I don't understand... (1)

bluemonq (812827) | about 3 years ago | (#36712752)

One swallow does not make a spring.

Just typical (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36712738)

Typical yanks are world champions because everyone else plays Football ;-)

Re:Just typical (1)

bluemonq (812827) | about 3 years ago | (#36712782)

Funny, I wasn't aware that the Sky News' programmes Soccer AM and Soccer Saturday were American.

Re:Just typical (1)

TheABomb (180342) | about 3 years ago | (#36713076)

Except Canada. And Australia. Pretty much everywhere, in fact, where the words "foot" and "ball" mean those things.

If anything, you pommies are just too literal.

Re:Just typical (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36717770)

Not in Ireland either, football in Ireland refers to GAA Football, not soccer

Re:Just typical (1)

MichaelSmith (789609) | about 3 years ago | (#36717994)

And in Australia it means Aussie Rules. Not sure what the word is for the combined GAA vs AFL game though.

Re:Just typical (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36718464)

And in Melbourne it means Aussie Rules.

Fixed that for you.

Everywhere else in Australia, it means Rugby League.

Re:Just typical (1)

rainmouse (1784278) | about 3 years ago | (#36718246)

Except Canada. And Australia. Pretty much everywhere, in fact, where the words "foot" and "ball" mean those things

The US incorrectly named version should be renamed Hand Egg.

Re:Just typical (2)

KDR_11k (778916) | about 3 years ago | (#36713238)

Jocks play football, nerds teach robots how to play football.

Re:Just typical (1)

roguer (760556) | about 3 years ago | (#36713262)

And then, one day, the nerd's robot football team beats the best "jock" football team head-to-head. It's inevitable.

No video? (-1, Troll)

robot432 (2362020) | about 3 years ago | (#36712760)

Shame, TFA has no video of the play.
Yet, I managed to find it. Enjoy [thoughts.com]

Re:No video? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36712886)

Link is Goatse.

Re:No video? (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | about 3 years ago | (#36713368)

Thanks.

Does nerd soccer attract nerd hooligans?

Thanks for the food! (1)

robot433 (2362054) | about 3 years ago | (#36713772)

Funny:
"O neat, you quoted me! Now I have to ask, why do you do this? seriously whats the motivation?"
"1999 called they want their overused shock pictures back."
"Parent post is a goatsex picture. Do not follow. You're an asshole of the proportions in that picture."
"Link above is to goatse. Fuck you douchebag."
"Turn on TinyUrl previews. It saves lives."
"Ugh. Goatse. NSFW. Asshole (poster and picture, both)."
"Seriously ... new account to post that ... what a douche!"
"You're a fucking douchbag." - "That is the most accurate comment yet"
"Not gonna click it to find out, but I'd be surprised if parent's link wasn't goatse... It appears you would be correct sir. Why oh why do I always forget..."
"My word, what is wrong with your anus? I'd get that checked out."
"It's because of Assholes like you that I can no longer trust URL shorteners"
"Would advise against clicking the link in the troll post above. Especially if you're at work atm."
"Thanks, I'm reading slashdot in class like a good student and just got tubgirl'd."
"Watching second monitor, there was something wrong with the other screen. Control + w. Phew..."
"Hey family! Come look! They're opening the Google Talk client! Now, click here......" (sees goatse)
"I tried to post warnings about the goaste loving jerk yesterday but was modded into oblivion as a karma whore"
"Posting your picture online again?", "Really? Are you not tired of this yet?"
(Me posts goatse link and tells that it is SFW): "You mean NSFW asshole."
"Can you not afford normal entertainment?" "This is grown up talk, 4chan is that way ->"
"Oops. goatse link" - "The AC speaks truth! (Well I didn't let it finish loading, but the browser was connecting to goatse.ru...)"
"He likes his urinal cakes nice and sudsy, so he tries to piss us off."
"Link is Goatse" - "Thanks. Does nerd soccer attract nerd hooligans?"

Hate:
"Motherfucker. Some of us are at work and don't want to have a drilled out anus pop up on their fucking screen. Christ."
"BAN HIM!" "Ur a faggot for posting that."
"Death to all assholes - Let's put you first into the guillotine"
"You fucker" - "I had the same thought as you. What a fucking asshole. The link is nsfw."
"I hate your guts.", "WTF you fucking asshole.", "Fucking troll, do not click there"
"I hope you die in a fire before you are old enough to contaminate the gene pool."
"It would be more interesting if I had a piece of pipe and your face, in close proximity so I could smash your face beyond recognition,"
"Bravo teeny bopper. You're a really mature mother fucker (or do you prefer father fucking? Damn you homo erotic shittter)."
"Wait! I think I hear your mommy calling to give your tongue a good soap washing. And maybe she'll execute you too"
"I did not even bother to look, but this same idiot has been doing this for weeks now. Fuck off asshole."
"Asshole. literally. Goatse is so old. Grow up you fool."
"Asshole... Ginormous asshole, in fact." "Ugh. Goatse. You asshole."
"Better than you, you arse bandit." "You're a lowlife faggot piece of shit."
"Ah, a sheep troll. "Baaa! I post disgusting photos! Baaa!"

"First time testemonies:
"Wow, all these years I managed to avoid seeing the goatse.cx guy, priding myself on my resilience to clicking on random image links from friends and trolls alike, taking comfort in the fact that I could identify a shock JPG based on a few lines of pixels while the holding the clipped window at the edge of my screen, and yet... now it's all for naught."

"After all these years, I finally fell for it. Just off to bleach my eyes.. thanks for that."

"Damnit, mod this guy up before GP gets any one else. My eyes, dear god my eyes, I'd managed not to see that until today!"
"WARNING: Don't click on the parent's link! Damn goatse! The first I experienced, no less.
"Parent is goatse. Dammit, and I've avoided it for a decade."
"ALERT ! goatse ya got me :("

Testimonies:
"Now *that* is how you goatse. Even got me, and I'm an oldfag."
"Long time since I've been rickrolled with goatse!"
"Goatse URL - Haven't seen that guy in a while"
"Damnit! nearly 15 years reading /. and I still fall in a goatse.cx trap !"
"Well played, sir. It's been a while since I've been Goatse'd"
"Congrats. It's been a long time since I saw goatse."
"Looks very open to me... (congrats, 'twas a while ago I was goatsed the last time)"

Strong emotion:
""No ads? Kwel!" click... "WTF!! My eyes!!!! rip.... them.... OFF!!"
"FUCK.YOU.ASS.HOLE."
"i WAS eating lunch you ass!"
"Oh dear god my eyes. Haven't seen THAT awful image in a while."
"My eyes are burning... argh! Damn you!"
"MY EYES... dude i am at work here "S "
"Oh goddammit. I didn't need that right before bed."
"Goatse warning! I'm still recovering."
"Please friends, I beg of you, do not click that link! Do not look at that image, whatever you do! It is a bad image! It is a goatse image."
"Man you made me barf .... disgusting little fellow the GOATSE Guy"

Dumbassess talking:
"Oh wow, retro-trolling. Soon we'll be back to page-widening, Steven King is dead and bell bottoms."
"Hey moron, try using different links."
"You fucking piece of shit!" , "You sorry piece of shit.", "You cunt.", "Fuck you." "Get fucked"
"What a retard..... enough said...." "Nice. Asshole."
"Yup, this is what your life amounted to. Posting goatse on Slashdot and collecting comment trophies."

Frustration:
"Can someone make a fucking goatse blocker firefox plugin please? This is pissing me off now."
"I am sick and tired of that crap on /. "
"Don't visit the link above, everyone. -sigh- Especially at work."
"Doh! One has to also recognize data urls. *sigh*"
"Damn! Mod this fucker to hell"
"*sigh* Goatse alert..."

Philosophy:
"Goatse trolls are getting better these days..."
"Why the sudden coordinated campaign for Goatse? Is someone making money off this?"
"You're right, this is the most coordinated troll campaign in a long time. Multiple accounts, multiple pages."
"Urgh...dammit, am I the only one thinking the goatse trolls are getting worse lately than they have been in the past five years?"
"Who found a way to monetize goatse at this late date? If we got half the effort of that campaign on real stuff we'd all have better software by now."
"Boy Goatsex is out in force today... - Every topic is littered with them..."
"You can't actually expect the Slashdot users to actually know enough not to respond to a goatse troll, right ?"
"Can we start banning people who post that hiding it behind a url shortening link like goo.gl?"
"How many times are you going to spam this link? Like we don't know where that goes......"
"The GP's post is just to get you to click a link with the Goatse man's picture on it."
"One of these days, this asshole gonna have a hard drive crash and lose his precious list, consigning his life's work to oblivion. He'll probably kill himself."

Admiration:
"Cool goatse link bro"
"Giggles. That made my day. Thank you."
"You are one dedicated troll."
"Well played, sir. Well played."
"A link that redirects to a page containing goatse? How clever of you!"
"Thank you for that informational link"
"Interesting use of Data URLs for Goatse linking."
"Nice Goatse dude"
"Good one, Sir."
"Nice link to have!"

Funny warnings:
"Link Warning!!! Not for those at work or of a nervous disposition, or even those bored with the stupid Goatse image."
"You really don't want to click the fundamental link, you'll be scarred for life."
"Above Link NSFW... The picture was just wrong... wrong..."
"WARNING! Above link is not something anyone wants to see!"
"Parent should be modded down. Link is NSFW and mentally scarring."
"Just post the damn url, i'm not going to click on a tinyurl link and get goatse'd or something.."
"High likelyhood of being a Goatse link. Proceed with caution"
"Didn't click it, but the magic 8-ball says goatse."

Misc:
"That's somewhat clever, but some of us do know what base-64 encoding is."
"The fuck is a goatse? it's some dude pulling his arse open."
"Could not someone at slashdot write a small script to blacklist url's that have been flagged troll? I'll do it if you pay me a slave wage..."
"Someone please mod this guy down... Don't click his link."
"Mod to -1, please. this guy is an 'asshole'.... (yes, you guessed it)"
"Don't click the link! Goatse wannabe."
"Danger, goatse"

The U.S. Team "RoMeLa": (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36712866)

Hong, Lee, Han, Nguyen, Song, Orekhov, Hopkins, Pesek, Lee, McGill, Nunez, Kapadia, Donnellan, Thakur

The Chinese team won the Middle Size League, btw.

Re:The U.S. Team "RoMeLa": (0, Troll)

roguer (760556) | about 3 years ago | (#36713240)

All wonderful American names, just like "Barack Obama". God how I love my "melting pot" country.

Re:The U.S. Team "RoMeLa": (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36719298)

I don't think it's a troll. I remember when I was cheering on Chang in tennis and LeMond in cycling and Kwan in ice skating. The US really is a melting pot. The northern Europeans populated the US first, so people think of those sorts of names (for example, Smith, Larsen, Jones, Meyer) as representative of the US, but really they are representative of particular immigrants. The distribution of immigrants has been changing recently, especially in urban areas. So, expect to see lots of Rodriquez, Lee, Nguyen, Chan, Kumar, Ali, etc. names representing the US in the future.

Re:The U.S. Team "RoMeLa": (1)

roguer (760556) | about 3 years ago | (#36727850)

I don't think it's a troll.

You're right. I'm not. I'm both serious and sincere.

So, expect to see lots of Rodriquez, Lee, Nguyen, Chan, Kumar, Ali, etc. names representing the US in the future.

In any case, Rodriguez and Sanchez are both already among the top 20 surnames in the US already. IIRC Rodriguez is in the top 10. Mohammed is in the top 50; top 30 if you same-rooted lump variants together: Smith/Smythe, Mohammed/Mohamet/Muhamad, Johnson/Johnsen/Jonson, etc.

And of course "Lee" is a pretty common Anglo-Saxon surname as well. My Vietnamese cousin (adopted, surname Morris) married blond, blue-eyed "Southern boy" Jeremy Lee. Now everyone who meets her husband is shocked (it is the US South after all) because they assumed her hubby was an "Chinese" Lee.

No video? (0)

robot433 (2362054) | about 3 years ago | (#36712874)

Shame, TFA has no video of the matches.
Yet, I managed to find it. Enjoy! [aeonity.com]

Re:No video? (1)

mabinogi (74033) | about 3 years ago | (#36718474)

well done. I haven't been suckered into a goatse link in years.

Soccer flamewar in 3...2... (1, Redundant)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about 3 years ago | (#36712878)

You may now begin the regular, tedious argument about an American site using American English. Please reply to this comment to continue the discussion on this topic, I'm sure none of the points have ever been made before and original insights will be heard.

Handball (1)

Frankie70 (803801) | about 3 years ago | (#36713028)

Ok - let me start. How the hell can you call a game where ball spends more time in the players hands as football.
In football, there should be a penalty any time someone(except the goalkeeper) touches the ball with his hands when the ball is in play.

Re:Handball (1)

roguer (760556) | about 3 years ago | (#36713190)

I honestly don't know.

But riddle me this: How can you call a game where no one rubs their hind legs together to make a chirping noise "Cricket"? After all, sports are all about their names, right?

Or maybe this: If the purity of "football" is in the name, why are you allowed to touch the ball with head, chest, rump, knee, etc.? If hands are off-limits because of the name of the game, then why aren't other body parts?

Or maybe let's just call the whole conversation ridiculous and be done with it.

Re:Handball (2)

filthpickle (1199927) | about 3 years ago | (#36714408)

Even more ridiculous....the English came up with the word soccer. It was a play on "association" in "association football". When the game came over here, we already had American football, so we used the other word they had for it.

Not ridiculous...did anyone else watch that US women's world cup match today? What I am about to say is shocking...

It was as exciting a sporting event as I have ever watched. Seriously.

Re:Handball (1)

StuartHankins (1020819) | about 3 years ago | (#36717090)

+1 Insightful. I've heard from many friends all abuzz regarding this game and I'm sorry I missed it.

Re:Handball (1)

artor3 (1344997) | about 3 years ago | (#36713386)

This website is neither about slashes nor dots! I am outraged and will bring this up at every single opportunity!

Signed,
Every European to ever use the internet

Re:Handball (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 3 years ago | (#36713476)

How the hell can you call a game where ball spends more time in the players hands as football.

Like this: "Football." Pretty easy, eh? I'll bet even you can do it.

Re:Handball (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | about 3 years ago | (#36713672)

The ball is advanced down the field by foot. Using your definition above, soccer should be renamed to kickball.

Seriously, we've had this argument, you must be aware of its reply by now. Like e4-e5 in chess.

Re:Handball (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36715510)

The ball is advanced down the field by foot. Using your definition above, soccer should be renamed to kickball.

Seriously, we've had this argument, you must be aware of its reply by now. Like e4-e5 in chess.

The idea that the game of football is so called because it is played "on foot" is a folk etymology and probably a 19th century invention by rugby enthusiasts. There's absolutely no evidence for it, and lots of good reason against it, since all games in medieval England were played on foot, not just football. Whereas, we have direct evidence from Shakespeare himself that football was a game played with the foot used to kick a round ball: "am I sound round with you that you spurn (kick away) me thus?". We also have drawings from 18th century London of people kicking balls. Yes there are "folk football" games like the Shrovetide game where the ball is carried, but it's a modern interpretation to call such games "folk football" when they were originally just "ball" games named after the holiday they were played on, and not "football" in any kind of generic sense.

Is it really that hard? (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 3 years ago | (#36712904)

Did anyone else watch the video [youtube.com] ? Is it really that hard to make robots that can walk decently?

It seems like from a mechanical standpoint, it wouldn't be too hard to make something that mimics the muscular structure of the body......it's not like human muscles are particularly strong, or human nerves fast transmitting, or human sensors high precision. I'm having trouble understanding what the challenge is in building a robot that works reasonably well (or at least not dreadfully slow).

Re:Is it really that hard? (4, Insightful)

Smauler (915644) | about 3 years ago | (#36712978)

Our sensors _are_ pretty high precision, and very well integrated with our brain. They're also integrated well with each other. The three _big_ ones that are used in football would be sight, equilibrioception (balance), and proprioception (limb awareness), IMO (with touch and hearing playing lesser parts). Those 3 alone are very hard to replicate well in robotics, and combine into a complete package.

Re:Is it really that hard? (1)

m4ktub (2333996) | about 3 years ago | (#36718648)

I don't think we really know how we think and act. Also, our sensors are hardly high precision.

Robocup results are anthropomorphic by design but the people involved quickly realize they have a bunch of wires that break and boards that burn in their hands; not very human of the robots. In the end - in Robocup they say 2050 - we will not have a replica of human perception. My guess is we will have a cyborg with her own way of perception and that perception may not be high-precision at all. Our is not and works pretty well most of the time (by human standards).

Re:Is it really that hard? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36713050)

It's the control systems that are complicated.

Re:Is it really that hard? (1)

sbates (1832606) | about 3 years ago | (#36713168)

You have to think about what you do when you walk. It's very rare that any two of your steps are precisely the same. You are constantly adjusting the length of the stride, the roll of the foot, the vertical position of your toes, the angle at which your knees bend, etc. You don't think about it consciously, but if you tried you might find you have a hard time walking smoothly :)

Like Smauler says, we have not only awareness of these parts independently but also in relation to each other and to the ground. It's very difficult to make those kinds of connections in software. If you disagree you are always welcome to challenge the robotics experts at, for example, MIT.

Re:Is it really that hard? (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 3 years ago | (#36713194)

So what you are saying is, it's not the hardware that is the roadblock for better soccer-playing robots, it's the software? That's kind of cool.

Re:Is it really that hard? (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | about 3 years ago | (#36713284)

Many leagues use standardized robots, there are even completely software-based leagues (AR league, for example). It's a competition of software skills, not really much about electronics.

Re:Is it really that hard? (4, Insightful)

vlm (69642) | about 3 years ago | (#36713212)

Did anyone else watch the video [youtube.com] ? Is it really that hard to make robots that can walk decently?

  It seems like from a mechanical standpoint, it wouldn't be too hard to make something that mimics the muscular structure of the body......it's not like human muscles are particularly strong, or human nerves fast transmitting, or human sensors high precision. I'm having trouble understanding what the challenge is in building a robot that works reasonably well (or at least not dreadfully slow).

The devil is in the details. There's lots of muscles involved. Newbie mistake #1 is thinking you can build a walking mechanism using a really simplistic count of leg joints. Like trying to get away with about 4 servos per leg. You really do need a nearly fully articulated body including arms and spine, even if its cost is incredible compared to just two articulated legs. While walking to refill my water glass I felt my sore elbow moving as I dynamically balanced walking down the hall, and theoretically I wasn't using my elbow. Newbie mistake #2 is trying to use a single canned routine. Walk around some time and try to straighten or slump your back, it has an effect on gait. Even if you're not paying attention, your gait is pretty dynamic, and newbs can't program dynamic gait very well. Newbie mistake #3 is applying human male standards of beauty to something inhuman. To me, a reasonably well shaped 20s female human just coincidentally happens to have a "decent walk" that I would admire as she walks by. Other people, live and let live, their idea of living is Really liking the 4-legged gait of a sheep, or the 2 legged gait of a 'roo, etc. I'm sure to a robot, a similar robot would seem smooth and graceful, and if we don't like it, the robot's opinion would probably be to shrug shoulders and grunt "eh". Newbie mistake #4 is not emulating or handling the shock adsorption of soft tissue, both semi-statically and also dynamically. Not just female swaying as per above #3 or whatever, but the cushion of the spine and feet (and shoes!)

Re:Is it really that hard? (1)

Sir_Lewk (967686) | about 3 years ago | (#36713314)

"Newbie mistake #3 is applying human male standards of beauty to something inhuman"

It's not a matter of beauty, it's a matter of function. These things take minutes to cover mere meters.

Re:Is it really that hard? (2)

vlm (69642) | about 3 years ago | (#36713380)

"Newbie mistake #3 is applying human male standards of beauty to something inhuman"

It's not a matter of beauty, it's a matter of function. These things take minutes to cover mere meters.

The two are sometimes (often?) the same, looking at spots in the giant solution space of how far outside of static stability you're willing to leap in order to walk...

One local maximum seems to be human bipedal, give them some wide hips to store more batteries and the android would inevitably have a human female gait that we would think is hot and graceful and would inevitably (pendulum effects on the legs, dynamic stability of a spinal column, etc) be about as fast as a human female.

Another local maximum if you've got four legs and lots of rocks is turtles, personally I don't think they're hot; their gait is not terribly attractive, but it seems to work for them, or at least they're not extinct yet despite our best efforts.

The local maximum (or local maximum of beauty) if you're LiPoly powered, aluminum "boned" and only have 8 servos in your body, is apparently not coincident with human female gait, even if its beautiful in its own local maximum way.

Re:Is it really that hard? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36715134)

Trouble here is that they are trying to reach stability at the end of each step. Human walking is never performed like that. It's a controlled fall, the brain calculates several steps in advance and usually accounts for stability at the end of the whole walk, not immediately after the step. Ever seen young children or mentally suffering walking - the look for stability (static) at each step, their brains are not able to handle the dynamic just enough not to hit your nose on the ground process of calculating in advance. And for being able to do that there are a lot more sensors involved. Like feeling the ground, the cushioning properties of your shoe, the air pressure in all your skin, and compensating accordingly. Even drunk people brains do that prepahead for a number of steps, just that that their control feedback loop is impaired and delayed. Human bodies can change their density, effectively meaning shifting mass around, robots on the other hand, not so much.

Re:Is it really that hard? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36713364)

And newbie mistake #5 is posting a link to a video from Robocup 2010 .

Re:Is it really that hard? (2)

vlm (69642) | about 3 years ago | (#36713316)

it wouldn't be too hard to make something that mimics the muscular structure of the body......it's not like human muscles are particularly strong

No, its impossible at this time to even come close to human muscle as an engineering material IF you include strength to weight ratios of the entire system (heavy batteries), power to weight ratios, peak vs sustained power output, long term durability, total energy use / efficiency, etc.

People have been trying, and failing, to build artificial limbs for centuries for trauma victims, and not only are the artificial limbs not better than the original, but they generally don't even come close to the real thing. When athletes intentionally chop off their limbs to upgrade to cybernetic models, then building a humanoid torso and bolting the off the shelf prosthetic limbs to it, then we'll know it might be reasonable. However, note athletes are legendary at not being able to make intelligent long term decisions, so it still might not work well.

Re:Is it really that hard? (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 3 years ago | (#36713458)

ok, point taken, but look at the movie; all it would take is a goalie robot that can move within three seconds to a position where it can block the goal (and we are talking a two meter space here), and the team with that goalie would win. Is that really so hard? I mean, let's be honest, those robots were kind of pathetic.

Re:Is it really that hard? (1)

brian_tanner (1022773) | about 3 years ago | (#36713516)

That's last year's video. This year's video is linked from the summary. I haven't watched it yet, I'm just pointing out that you are being critical of the wrong thing.

Re:Is it really that hard? (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about 3 years ago | (#36713532)

oh, ok, good point, but this year's video isn't any better!

Re:Is it really that hard? (1)

brian_tanner (1022773) | about 3 years ago | (#36713762)

Sadly too true. But they're bigger!

Re:Is it really that hard? (1)

Skywolfblue (1944674) | about 3 years ago | (#36716916)

The leading robot (CHARLI) at least is a quite significant improvement over last year's video. Sure it's not running, but the precision and recognition of the ball are very noticeably improved. We shouldn't expect it to happen overnight, it's an extremely complex process. Baby steps, baby steps...

Re:Is it really that hard? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36716662)

No. The problem is there is no passion or desire to improve the status quo. Students these days are more interested in getting out of school and getting a job than they are in contributing to science. In fact, by the time they've almost graduated, they have little to no desire to contribute to science.

It IS hard. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36727172)

Did anyone else watch the video [youtube.com] ? Is it really that hard to make robots that can walk decently?

  It seems like from a mechanical standpoint, it wouldn't be too hard to make something that mimics the muscular structure of the body......it's not like human muscles are particularly strong, or human nerves fast transmitting, or human sensors high precision. I'm having trouble understanding what the challenge is in building a robot that works reasonably well (or at least not dreadfully slow).

Biggest challenge is the budget. From a mechanical standpoint, there is no challenge at all in building a 200mph car. Try do that with a small group of univ students and budget of $10K.

And there already are robots that walk well like honda asimo which costs multimilion dollars, and human muscles are also very strong too.

I was there! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36713438)

I just wanted to say that. Also to explain a few things:

These humanoid robots are cheap (~$25-30k) and use standard servos. Making them balance is extremely hard because of limited senses, soft and uneven floors, and limits on the foot size and weight of the robot. If the robot actually falls over, you are looking at thousands to repair it. The torques applied as limbs get longer are huge.

Not a sweep (2)

Aragorn379 (260855) | about 3 years ago | (#36713548)

Winning 2 divisions in 1 league out of 5 is NOT a sweep. A sweep would be winning all the leagues. 1 out of 5 isn't even close. Congratulations on the wins in the humanoid league.

For those that are curious, the other 4 leagues are simulation (focusing on team play and low barrier to entry), small size robot (hardware/software combined, wheeled robots), middle size robot (hardware/software combined, wheeled robots), and standard platform league (software only using real humanoid robots).

Re:Not a sweep (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36713902)

Psssssst. Don't spoil it for the Duhmericans. They're losing the war in Afghanistan, so at least let them have this "sweeping" victory.

Back To The Drawing Board... (1)

littlewink (996298) | about 3 years ago | (#36714522)

for this endeavor. I have little doubt that the problem they're solving is hard. But is this progress?

Anyone trying an evolutionary layered approach where the control code is evolved?

Seriously, it looks like my Alzheimer-wracked mother trying to play soccer, except that, unlike her, it continues to pursue the ball. I hope the DoD's killer robots are more nimble than this: otherwise our Android Corps will be the laughingstock of the next big war.

Robots and women (2)

formfeed (703859) | about 3 years ago | (#36714960)

U.S. Team RoMeLa has swept Robocup 2011, winning first place in both the kid size and teen size divisions.

And at the same time, the US women's soccer team advanced to the Semi final.
I don't like where this is going, Sarah Connor::

The US still sucks, except for robots and women.

Re:Robots and women (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36721866)

You beat me to the comment.
Every time I am abroad I get made fun of, to which I reply: It's a girls game in the US and the ladies always kick ass at it!
Now I have to add: btw, our robots are better tan yours!
Peace :)

Apparently a new definition of "swept" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36715338)

RoMeLa did well and deservedly so, but this apparently is a special meaning of the word "swept" I was not aware of. RoMeLa won the kid-size and teen-size humanoid divisions (which are quite similar to each other), but not the adult-size humanoid division, the standard platform humanoid division (by far the biggest division), the small-size robot division, the middle-size robot division, the 2-D simulation division, the 3-D simulation division, the RoboCup@Home division, the RoboCup rescue division, or the RoboCup Simulation division. Not to mention the RoboCup Junior groups. Basically they won two divisions collectively consisting of about 10% of RoboCup participation. RoMeLa's robots also then went on to lose an exhibition match against a standard platform humanoid league team. That's quite a sweep!

Re:Apparently a new definition of "swept" (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36716242)

RoMeLa's robots also then went on to lose an exhibition match against a standard platform humanoid league team.

Considering how crappy the Nao robots are[1], that's pretty sad.

[1] unless something changed in the last year, as I haven't been paying too much attention.

Full-sized? (1)

HeadSoft (147914) | about 3 years ago | (#36721178)

This is very interesting work and the robots are very impressive... but shouldn't full-sized be at least... adult human sized? It seems rare to see projects with fully 6-foot-tall humanoids, I know it's a much greater challenge... but isn't that exactly why it should be done?

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...