Comments on: The Robotic Right Stuff: What It Takes to Become the First Robot Astronaut

By: Folder Printing

Folder Printing — Sun, 12 Jun 2011 18:40:03 +0000

Love the article… thanks for the post!

By: ghost

ghost — Sun, 19 Dec 2010 01:49:07 +0000

We sent robots to mars in 1971. Yes, 1971. we lost contact with the first two, but we did succeed in 1976.

By: georges

georges — Wed, 03 Nov 2010 16:09:07 +0000

Sending robots on Mars has already been done folks. Mars Explorer, etc …
What would be new is a robot with AI on Mars.
But let’s first do a robot with AI on earth, or even just a computer with true AI on earth!!!

By: Science Box

Science Box — Wed, 03 Nov 2010 09:40:38 +0000

Great! May I copy this article on my blog?

By: Frank

Frank — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 13:40:15 +0000

http://nasatech.net/Robonaut100812/

Here’s a spherical image of Robonaut and its development team in the SSPF at KSC on August 12th. Be sure and look up and down. Enjoy!

By: Earp

Earp — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 06:15:18 +0000

Jake Levee said:
‘I imagine AI isn’t too far off in our future.’

Unfortunately, it is, seeing as there has been virtually no progression in AI in the last 20 years. Making computers better at doing tasks and acting autonomously is not AI.

We could send robots to mars no problem in 50 years – but at our current state of AI development, they wont be AI. Some type of breakthrough (totally outside improving processors and programming) will be required for this (perhaps simulations of actual brains).

By: michael-savory

michael-savory — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 00:32:53 +0000

That’s one good looking robot! He’s got the right stuff. By the way, check out this Physics site http://BlueSolver.com

By: ojak

ojak — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 00:15:07 +0000

As neat as all this is, it’s still too small-scale and uninspiring. Look, we went to the moon in less than a decade and the public will never really give two sh*ts about a “toy” robot. After working on DARPA grants for many years, I can confidently say that the primary problem is that researchers (i.e. scientists) are generally bad at tangible deliverables. It’s always easier for grantees to deliver on loosely specified long-term “theoretical” goals than on concrete, discrete achievement.

I guess I’m saying that NASA lacks a charismatic visionary to set bold, uncompromising deadlines. We need a true visionary that will put up… otherwise the public will never back the investments necessary to truly excel in this field.

By: anonymous

anonymous — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 00:14:24 +0000

R2 isn’t part of the crew pics because he’s been packed up since July. They could have used one of the other units for pics though, probably should have.

By: sam s.

sam s. — Mon, 01 Nov 2010 20:58:17 +0000

Why is R2 not part of the crew pics? I mean after all,it is a crew member(changing filters,cleaning)? And not to mention it is the first of its kind?I feel that if we are going to go in this direction,we should treat A.I.bots with respect and dignity?Someday we may be faced with a civil rights movement from A.I.bots….Mmmmm?