Beta
×

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!

Robocones

michael posted more than 10 years ago | from the rubbernecking dept.

Robotics 291

Anonymous Meoward writes "Researchers at the University of Nebraska - Lincoln have come up with robotic traffic barrels ('bollards', for our British readers) that can be repositioned by remote control, thus minimizing a road worker's time in harm's way. Apparently, the barrels can be grouped and positioned by an autonomous 'shepherd' unit, that is also smart enough to also remove an errant barrel from its herd. The barrels themselves are about as intelligent as.. well, orange barrels. Okay, let's cue the more obvious jokes..." Reader zombieflesheater submitted this previous attempt to mobilize road furniture.

cancel ×

291 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Practical or somebody's thesis? (5, Insightful)

grub (11606) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006438)


"Deploying and retrieving highway markers on open roads is hazardous so the robots will reduce risks for workmen," researcher Shane Farritor said."

Are there statistics anywhere on how many workers are killed or injured while moving cones every year?
The article mentions risk without refering to hard data so it seems like a solution in search of a problem. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, I just want to know how they qualify the risk they mention or if it's a neat university project solely for the sake of being a neat university project.

Re:Practical or somebody's thesis? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006468)

my nuts hurt, thinking about you makes me ache

Re:Practical or somebody's thesis? (4, Insightful)

Woogiemonger (628172) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006524)

Are there statistics anywhere on how many workers are killed or injured while moving cones every year? The article mentions risk without refering to hard data so it seems like a solution in search of a problem. I'm not saying it's a bad idea, I just want to know how they qualify the risk they mention or if it's a neat university project solely for the sake of being a neat university project.

See, here's the disconnect between book smarts and street smarts, literally. Have you ever tried to cross the New Jersey Turnpike when dense traffic is going as high as 90mph? Ever play frogger? Having a way to move cones without risk is an obviously good idea. The only thing that worries me is a driver getting distracted from looking at the new technology.

Re:Practical or somebody's thesis? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006532)

That doesn't answer the parent's question. Where's the data?

Re:Practical or somebody's thesis? (1)

Short Circuit (52384) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006526)

In Michigan, we recently had more laws passed which are intended to protect road workers. Things like double fines for violations in construction zones. And penalties for injuring or killing a road worker.

It's a going public concern, so statistics are irrelevant.

Re:Practical or somebody's thesis? (5, Informative)

Re-Pawn (764948) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006542)

From the CDC (1998):
Among the 492 work zone fatalities, the leading occupations were construction laborer (42%), truck driver (9%), construction trades supervisor (8%), and operating engineer (8%). The most common primary sources of injury were trucks (45%), road grading and surfacing machinery (15%), and cars (15%). Seventy-four percent of the work zone fatality victims were employed privately, the remainder by state or local governments (13% each). In 318 of the 465 vehicle and equipment-related fatalities within work zones, a worker on foot was struck by a vehicle. Victims of these events were as likely to be struck by a construction vehicle (154 fatalities) as by a passing traffic vehicle (152 fatalities). Incidents involving backing vehicles were prominent among the 154 worker-on-foot fatalities that occurred within the confines of the work zone (51%).

Definitely not an epidemic, though it appears that the workers themselves cause about half of the accidents.

Re:Practical or somebody's thesis? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006568)


Excellent! Thank you.

No statistics (1)

not_a_product_id (604278) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006577)

I don't know of any statistic but I'd assume that putting the cones down initially must be particularly hazardous. If someone drives the same route a lot they will just expect the flow of traffic to go a certain way and their brain will process any differences more slowly and they'll have to think about something that's normally automatic for them. Pretty good chance they won't see the guy in the orange vest til it's too late

Proximty Alarms (2, Interesting)

Short Circuit (52384) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006608)

Once cars have proximity alarms, worker garments could be configured to set them off...

Re:No statistics (1)

mike_mgo (589966) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006740)

Yes, but you would normally either have a flagman or a flashing arrow trucking (depending on the location) to warn oncoming traffic. So hopefully even drivers familiar with the route would be alerted to the work going on when the barrels are initially placed.

TEH SLAYERZ0RRZZ!!!!1!1`~~`` (nt) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006615)

Re:TEH SLAYERZ0RRZZ!!!!1!1`~~`` (nt) (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006699)

YAAAAAAAA!!!! Slayz000rrzzz 0wn5 j00, b147ch!!!!!!!!

Re:Practical or somebody's thesis? (5, Funny)

Trailwalker (648636) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006751)

There is no exageration about the deadliness of hightway work site accidents. Open and closing lanes is very dangerous - there is a small number of motorists who think that flaggers are there just to annoy them.

Some observations from a former flagger.

Every female with a drooling brat in school believes that nothing should stop her from picking up little Damien and taking him home to torture the new cat.

A coworker pointed out that our signs have words on them. This confuses motorists.

Most localities seem to have a tax on turn signal usage. Therefore, most motorists never use them. If they do use them, they are going straight anyway.

Elderly people have tunnel vision. They will never see the flagger at the side of the road.

From personal observation: An 80,000 lb haulers rig will stop a motorist who runs past a flagger station. So will any large yellow machine with CAT printed on its side.

Avoiding Cars... (4, Insightful)

LostCluster (625375) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006441)

This seems like a great idea for spreading out cones in a lane that's already closed, but what's there to warn drivers that a usually-stationary cone is about to move when there's no orange-vested human picking them up?

Re:Avoiding Cars... (4, Funny)

Dr Caleb (121505) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006499)

And what happens when you stop in the closed lane - then they suddenly have you surrounded because some worker has a really twisted sense of humour? :)

Re:Avoiding Cars... (1)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006591)

And what happens when you stop in the closed lane - then they suddenly have you surrounded because some worker has a really twisted sense of humour?

I'd say that it would then be a good time to make like a Bond movie.

"Hang on to your hat Martha! It's going to be a bumpy ride. YEEEHAAA!!!"

Lord Trink is My Master (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006442)

FP for Lord Trink!

Re:Lord Trink is My Master (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006510)

YOU Fale eet, f4gg0r

It has to be done (0, Redundant)

JamesD_UK (721413) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006448)

In Soviet Russia cones traffic you! Seriously though, I'd hate to be on the roads whilst an army of traffic cones went haywire, wandering into my way. It's bad enough having hundreds of stationary ones :-)

Uhhh... (3, Funny)

Paulrothrock (685079) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006452)

I for one welcome our new robo-bollard overlords.

Orange cones probably wouldn't be any worse... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006507)

...than our current overlords [whitehouse.gov] .

Re:Uhhh... (1)

Paulrothrock (685079) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006677)

To continue my post: Is it me or do you just wanna run over those damn cones/barrels/card-type things? Your stuck in traffic next to a perfectly good road that's blocked off by those damn traffic control devices. And you just want to yank the wheel over, plow through a couple of them and take off.

Maybe it's me. Maybe it's because I live in the land of perpetual road construction [state.pa.us]

More obsticles (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006459)

All more obsticles for those dumbass drivers talking on their cell phones and checking their make-up.

I for one... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006460)

welcome our robotic traffic barrel overlords.

/had to be done.

Self Healing Minefield (4, Interesting)

SmackCrackandPot (641205) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006462)

All you have to do now is replace these cones with mines, add some pattern recognising AI, and you have the Self Healing Minefield [darpa.mil] .

Re:Self Healing Minefield (1)

Ours (596171) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006522)

I dont thing minefields are often put on nice flat patches of highway. And there robots are probably not build to drive on uneven terrain. I'd rather see a life-preserving robot like this not have any military applications.

Re:Self Healing Minefield (5, Funny)

Araneas (175181) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006531)

Combine both. Self healing traffic cone array with a serious deterrant against not obeying the lane closure signs.

Re:Self Healing Minefield (1)

Short Circuit (52384) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006573)

Ideally, cones should be very massive, so as to reduce the kinetic energy of a car voilating the lane limits. Resulting damage to the car would a significant deterrant.

Re:Self Healing Minefield (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006658)

You don't need AI. You just need one of these [rctoys.com] and to put a little more processing power into the "mines" (the military is always happy to throw money at shit which will explode, they ought to just make a money bomb and get it over with) so that they can be a mesh network and do the pattern recognition. The system already uses image recognition to decide where the things should go, and it's not artificially intelligent, nor does it need to be.

Re:Self Healing Minefield (1)

Paulrothrock (685079) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006721)

You can have your self-healing minefield once everyone else can have replacement limbs. Minefields are a terrorist weapon that don't turn off and don't know the difference between friend, foe or civilian.

Re:Self Healing Minefield (1)

zx75 (304335) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006764)

Don't give them ideas. We already have problems with tens of thousands of unexploded mines, so much so that most of the developed world has signed anti-landmine treaties (minus the US of course) that we don't need self-repositioning mines. All that would do is we could never clear a safe area from landmines without finding every single one in the field.

It may be a good 'strategic' idea, but it is a despicable one from a humanitarian point of view.

We can give traffic workers robocones... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006472)

...but we still can't manage to make them work at night when there is no traffic. I look forward to a future of driving past robots who are sitting around doing nothing but drinking oil.

Highway workers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006513)

Anything is an improvement over those highway "workers" who sit there eating sandwiches and doing nothing except standing up to pee on fenders of passing cars.

I saw Metallica last night (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006473)

Yeah, I was like 20 feet from Lars for part of the night (while his drums were moving around the stage).

Lars is the man! His views on P2P are correct and he rocks in concert. Chew on that slashbots.

The one armed drummer from.. (-1, Offtopic)

3.5 stripes (578410) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006506)

Def leopard drums ten times as well as him. What a tard.

Have you met Def? I have (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006537)

"Def leopard drums ten times as well as him. What a tard."

I got an autograph from Def after a concert once. He's a great drummer!

Re:Have you met Def? I have (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006657)

did that autograph come after you sucked the band's cocks backstage?

Flocking Road Cones (4, Funny)

pararox (706523) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006476)

Personally, I'd be more interested in seeing the development of flocking road cones [halfbakery.com] . But that's just me :)

-pararox-

Original Article (5, Informative)

moon_monkey (323491) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006479)

The original article can be found here [newscientist.com] .

Watch out for... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006480)

vicious Gangs of "Keep Left" signs!

Re:Watch out for... (1)

catdevnull (531283) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006523)

that was my immediate thought as well!

EU legislation to follow? (5, Funny)

NevDull (170554) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006481)

Will there be a requirement for half the barrels to be standing around doing nothing, as per union rules?

If they're deployed in France, how long until they go on strike?

Important feature? (5, Funny)

Mononoke (88668) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006487)

Have they worked out a way to have one cone doing its job while 5 other cones gather around and watch?

This should just be the start (4, Interesting)

Deag (250823) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006497)

From the bbc article the bollards move slowly. And I think if they worked well, it's a good idea.

But it should just be the start. I want to see whole roads like this. Lots of traffic going to A? well we'll just move some of the roads going to C. I see lots of them like big snakes swirling around the sky relaying themselves so that our road networks are alot more efficent. We could all end up alot more lost, but what harm?

Re:This should just be the start (1)

Short Circuit (52384) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006696)

That'll require automated navigation on the car's part. I certainly wouldn't be able to navigate it manually...

"shepherd unit" (5, Funny)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006511)

That would suggest to me that it works wirelessly... Maybe someone will bring new meaning to the phrase "War Driving".

How long until a bunch of bored slash-nerds g out and round up enough cones to spell PENIS on the highway?

Great! (1)

crc32 (133399) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006514)

"We're designing the system in such a way that the barrels are very stupid

Great, more union road workers... now nothing will ever get done!

so that they are very reliable and inexpensive.

Psahw!

Lawsuits (4, Interesting)

DaHat (247651) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006515)

I can see the lawsuits now! Either one of these cones feels suicidal and it moves it's self into traffic only to get hit at high speed... or someone realizes that they are able to move and runs into one on purpose, in either case, instant profit for who ever hits em.

It is similar to the old Q of if we had cars which could drive themselves... who is to blame when two computer driven cars get into an accident with each other.

Re:Lawsuits (1)

lechuck80 (672996) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006578)

who is to blame when two computer driven cars get into an accident with each other

Linux!

Re:Lawsuits (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006621)

who is to blame when two computer driven cars get into an accident with each other.

Um same thing as now, whoever is responsible for the mistake is who to blame. Why do you think things suddenly change for "computer driven cars"??

International English (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006517)

('bollards', for our British readers)

"British" = International.

American English is only (officially) spoken in the USA. British English is what's spoken in Britain + what's taught everywhere else in the world to us non-native English speakers.

Re:International English (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006598)

Not true. American English is very often taught in foreign countries.

Re:International English (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006756)

Foreign countries such as Alabama?

Of course AE is taught, but only in the way that we learn the differences between the English dialects. Teaching and testing [ielts.org] is done in British/International English.

In what country are you suggesting that AE is taught instead of (International/British) English?

Re:International English (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006601)

Correcting errors in the OP is not "Offtopic", Mr Fucktard Moderator.

not true (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006725)

the post being modded down was in error. British = British only.

Re:International English (1)

Mateito (746185) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006654)

In Australia we refer to them as "cones" too. In some parts they are still known as "Witches Hats".

Having said that, if you ask your mates if they'd like to join you to pull a couple of "Witches Hats", they wouldn't know what you were on about.

(Hopefully, this is not a oblique surf culture reference).

Bright-orange witch hats (4, Funny)

AtariAmarok (451306) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006704)

"In Australia we refer to them as "cones" too. In some parts they are still known as "Witches Hats"."

They are known by this name in northern Minnesota, too. In parts of the country where deer hunting is a real big deal, there were problems with witches being shot out of the sky by accident during Halloween, which occurs during bow-hunting season. The state government forced all witches to wear bright hunter's-orange hats.

The witches got angry about this, just like the Amish who objected to having orange triangles on their buggies. In fact, in 1999, one angry witch known to most as "Bemidji Bertha" passed a curse on St. Paul. It is believed that the election of Jesse Ventura was a fulfillment of the curse.

Bollards... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006518)

...to you too!

Drunk in charge of a bollard? (4, Funny)

Zerbey (15536) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006525)

I can just see it now... a bunch of highly intoxicated students riding around on these and getting themsleves arrested. Sounds like fun!

"Sir, is that your bollard?"
"Um... no shir"
"Are you a student?"
"Yesh shir"
"*sigh* Put it back will you?"
"OK shir, thanksh you"

(I had carried the thing for 3 miles by this point)

Re:Drunk in charge of a bollard? (2, Funny)

troc (3606) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006565)

I was once followed for over a mile by the police to make sure I did deposit both the cones and the shopping trolley they were in, back in their respective homes.

heh

Troc.

Re:Drunk in charge of a bollard? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006713)

How about the excuse, "The bollard followed me, officer! Honestly!"

Serioushly Offisher ... (1)

BabyDave (575083) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006530)

I didn't drive into those cones - they got up and ran in front of me!

What? Yes, I know I said that about the tree last week. No, I'm 100% sober ...well, maybe 87%.

Attack of the Robo-cones! (2, Funny)

nlinecomputers (602059) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006539)

What will happen when the drivers hit the cones? Will they strike back? I can just see having to avoid kamakaze attack cones.

traffic barrels? pfft (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006541)

you kerazee americans..

How accurate (1)

HarvardAce (771954) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006543)

How accurate will these new robo-cones be? Having lived on Long Island for 8 years, I've dealt with many, many cones in my day. I've seen problems where a single cone that is a foot farther out than it should be has caused major traffic problems, because the cone is making an already too narrow lane even narrower. And when you're going 80mph on the LIE, that can spell trouble.

Re:How accurate (1)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006768)

hmm...maybe you shouldn't be going 80mph through a construction zone.

Robots ? (3, Funny)

mirko (198274) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006547)

Why use robots when TOYS [imdb.com] did it so well ?

What about the physical characteristic changes? (4, Interesting)

idontgno (624372) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006552)

Normal road cones weigh about nothing. (A couple of pounds of soft plastic. Designed to fly out of the way or crush down when struck by a vehicle.)

Does adding an RF receiver and motors add weight and rigid bulk to the cone, making it more damaging to hit?

It's bad enough if you hit one of the road cones with the battery-powered flashers on the top, but that weighs very little. I hope the folks designing these keep impact-safety factors in mind.

Re:What about the physical characteristic changes? (2, Informative)

leperkuhn (634833) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006607)

The barrels are usually filled with water and can mess your car up if you drive into one or a dozen.

Re:What about the physical characteristic changes? (1)

lechuck80 (672996) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006635)

Those are usually found on highway exit ramps (at the fork). On small town roads, they weigh next to nothing so the local municipalities can drop 'em off the back of 'bubba's pickup truck'

Re:What about the physical characteristic changes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006705)

Does adding an RF receiver and motors add weight and rigid bulk to the cone, making it more damaging to hit?

Do you mean relative to a 3000 pound vehicle moving at 65 mph? The answer is probably "Yes, but not significantly moreso".

Imagine your car running over one of those toy radio-controlled cars. I bet it would be like that.

Re:What about the physical characteristic changes? (2, Informative)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006737)

The robotics portion of this device is in the very bottom of the cone and probably weighs about the same as a radio-controlled car (since that is basically what these things are, big ugly orange computer-controlled RC cars.) It's probably significantly less weight than the rest of the "bollard". (I wonder wtf the etymology of that is, if it's similar to botts' dots...)

Er anyway the point is that the only way it will make the thing more dangerous is if you hit it hard enough to send it flying and the base of it strikes something. This is somewhat likely since the base will probably be the heaviest part of the whole thing, but you could pad it up or something and remove the majority of the risk there.

I can just imagine (1)

w3weasel (656289) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006554)

How this will be when some overly bored slob takes the controls and decides to play with traffic.
rush hour just got a lot more interesting

I thought... (1)

Brando_Calrisean (755640) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006575)

.. "robocones" were what fem-bots store their high-caliber barrels in.

Next step (3, Funny)

boatboy (549643) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006584)

The obvious next step now will be for college students to steal them and make robotic traffic cone dorm tables.

Re:Next step (1)

lechuck80 (672996) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006606)

Wait till late some drunken night and they find the table moving around. "Hey Phil, what the hell was in this shit?"

*sigh* in russia, obviously (1)

bdejong (312792) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006599)

ok, this is my first atempt at genuine slashdot humor, so be kind on me.

[braces self]

In russia traffic barrels crash into you.

Re:*sigh* in russia, obviously (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006645)

and this is my first attempt at rude slashdot responses:

YOU FAIL IT

Re:*sigh* in russia, obviously (1)

chaidawg (170956) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006749)

soviet russia, but not a bad first try

Re:*sigh* in russia, obviously (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006767)

In soviet russia jokes suck at you!

Reminds me of Toy Story 2 (2, Insightful)

earthforce_1 (454968) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006602)


Remember the animated toys causing a huge pileup while crossing a busy street disguised as traffic cones?

I can also see somebody hacking into the control frequencies for these things and pulling evil pranks, which may kill somebody.

Correction... (4, Funny)

D-Cypell (446534) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006610)

('bollards', for our British readers)

The correct terminology is 'bollocks'. Also given the nature of the text it would be more correctly expressed using 'to' rather than 'for'. Also, as the US language is obviously derivitive of true english this terminology should also be valid in the US.

So thats is...

"Bollocks to our British readers"

to which the clear and obvious response is..

"Bollocks to you too..."

Re:Correction... (3, Funny)

REBloomfield (550182) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006718)

Who in the hell modded this informative?!?!?!?!?

hilarious maybe, although from reading it, the correct British term would be 'traffic cone', but that's nowhere near as funny....

GREAT IDEA (1)

karmaflux (148909) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006611)

We don't spend enough on road maintenance.

Perfect! (5, Funny)

Tenebrious1 (530949) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006612)

Steal a few of these, set them up in the street in front of my apartment to save my parking spot. When my car approaches, a RF sensor will tell the cones to part to allow my car to slide into the spot. Fantastic!

The future of motorsports (1)

Jonah Hex (651948) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006613)

This is exactly what's missing in all of today's motorsports, robot barrels that can be controlled by remote computer or operator. And I really do mean ALL of today's motorsports, from the Indy to my local (sorta) Detroit Gran Prix and (closer) Flat Rock Speedway's Enduro 250's and Figure 8 races. Ok, so maybe they'd be a drag in one autosport... but they work for the rest!

Seriously, I don't know why more things like this can't be roboticized, from garbage cans that right themselves and walk 'round to the dumpster for a quick, um, dump; to remote control concrete barriers that are used for the more common long term lane closures here in MI. Definately more robots to come, with and without simple/complex brains.

Jonah Hex

Re:The future of motorsports (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006661)

I'm not sure I like all this robotic harvesting of the traffic cones. Please, help save the cones. Join the Traffic Cone Preservation Society. [ucla.edu]

Can't wait (2, Interesting)

nizo (81281) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006632)

Anyone have schematics for these guys, so we can start thinking of nifty new hacks for them even before they are deployed? Maybe a helper 'bot to help my carry my groceries into the house.

Hi. I'm Troy McClure (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006639)

Hi. I'm Troy McClure. You might remember me from such highway robot movies as "Mad Max 6: The Road Is the Warrior" and "Coneroads" co-starring Dan Aykroyd.

SUBSCRIBER RUINER (-1, Troll)

GNAA Buttsex Robot (775563) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006643)

//slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/04/29/1215238&mod e=thread&tid=133&tid=137&tid=186&tid=2 16
Posted by michael [slashdot.org] in The Mysterious Future!
from the corel-isn't-dead-yet? dept.
MikeCapone [blogspot.com] writes "The Jem Report [thejemreport.com] has an extensive review [thejemreport.com] (all in one page, no flash ads -- what a concept!) of Corel WordPerfect [wordperfect.com] 12 for Windows and the proof of concept comeback of WordPerfect for Linux."
This was automatically brought to you by Subscriber Ruiner 1.0

stupidest idea ever (2, Interesting)

WormholeFiend (674934) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006650)

this is stupid and costly.

how many regular cones get accidentally crushed by traffic? or randomly flung by bigrig turbulence?

one "good" thing that is bound to happen though, is some Anonymous Coward stealing a few of them and hacking them apart and back together again (possibly even to try and run Linux on it?).

SUBSCRIBER RUINER (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006664)

//slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/04/29/1215238&mod e=thread&tid=133&tid=137&tid=186&tid=2 16
Posted by michael [slashdot.org] in The Mysterious Future!
from the corel-isn't-dead-yet? dept.
MikeCapone [blogspot.com] writes "The Jem Report [thejemreport.com] has an extensive review [thejemreport.com] (all in one page, no flash ads -- what a concept!) of Corel WordPerfect [wordperfect.com] 12 for Windows and the proof of concept comeback of WordPerfect for Linux."
This was automatically brought to you by Subscriber Ruiner 1.01

I'm a race car driver wannabe (1)

foxtrot (14140) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006670)

...and I compete in SCCA Solo II autocross [autocross.com] .

These things're gonna give me nightmares...

What? No one posts... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006681)

Imagine a Beowulf cluster of those!

I swear! (3, Funny)

Nuclear Elephant (700938) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006682)

Officer, I swear those cones jumped right out in front of me!

Barrels (1)

blackholepcs (773728) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006712)

[stupid]The only drawback to these barrels I see is, how do all the monkeys inside go potty if not all over themselves?[/stupid]

Other possibilities (1)

Patlag (756412) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006715)

Next project for this team may be to make a robot to put cones back up wich been hit by a car driver! By the way, could it be more affordable to make a single robot to manage ordinary cones?

Costly Little Cones (2, Funny)

Gettinglucky (655935) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006727)

It is nice to see that tax payer money can go to replacing endless cones that are used for driving target practice. Maybe they can flip them over and have them deliver ice cream on real hot days to all the workers sitting beside the road.

miccrosoft? (1)

Rutje (606635) | more than 10 years ago | (#9006742)

Let's hope these cones are not operated by a Microsoft operating system... in that case you could expect:
- the blue cone of death - regular critical updates and patches - Online product activation - non removable embedded media player

Imagine (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 10 years ago | (#9006762)

A Beowulf Cluster of these!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?