Newsgroups: comp.robotics
Path: brunix!news.Brown.EDU!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!koriel!lll-winken.llnl.gov!fnnews.fnal.gov!ornl!vd6.rpsd.ornl.gov!draperjv
From: draperjv@ornl.gov
Subject: RE: Father of Robotics
Message-ID: <draperjv.62.2D5BB214@ornl.gov>
Lines: 52
Sender: usenet@ornl.gov (News poster)
Organization: Oak Ridge National Laboratory
X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 1994 16:28:04 GMT
Lines: 52

br@cs.cmu.edu (Bill Ross) says:


>   This is a kind of silly topic unless we decide what "Father of
 >  Robotics" means...

Well, this is the kind of rational approach that can really screw up a good 
thread, or any argument, for that matter! :-)

>   First person to (fictionally) describe a robot
>       probably could find an instance in the 1800's - certainly in 1920's

There is a story in the Prose Edda  (I think that's it) that is very old (as 
far back as when centuries only had 3 digits) about a frost giant building a 
man of clay to battle Thor...does that count?

>    First person to use the term "robot" or "robotics"
>        eastern european guy?

Capek? Didn't he just use the word "worker" in his own language, and we've 
copied it without translating because it sounded good?

>     First person to use those terms for what they mean today            
>        Asimov?  

Hmmmm...My impression from Asimov is that a robot is a person with a metal 
skin.  This is the "C3-PO" model of a robot (or "Mr. Data" model, to be more 
up to the minute). I think real robots are qualitatively different than people 
("R2D2" model?) and likely to remain so. The robot-as-person paradigm may be 
the way the typical laymen thinks about the term, but I don't think it's a 
good model for researchers to use. To me, this is a problem with most 
robots-related science fiction, but I quit reading it many years ago, so maybe 
I'm behind the times.

Is it toooo heretical to criticise Asimov here? Or science fiction?

>     First person to construct a robot (now we have to define "robot")      
>       The "Doodlebug" was a clockwork autopiloted un-manned bomb built      
>       in 1920's or 1930's -- does that count?

How about the clockwork "animatronics" Mad King Ludwig of Bavaria built at 
Neue Schwanstein (I'll eat my hat if I actually spelled that correctly) during 
the 18th century? I don't recall if this was programmable.

> Hmmm...
>   Bill

Yeah, but it beats writing weekly reports.

John


