Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

We're offering banner ads on our site from just $5!

1. Details HERE. 2. GDNet+ Subscriptions HERE. 3. Ad upload HERE.


some stuff about robots


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
8 replies to this topic

#1 rouncer   Members   -  Reputation: 291

Like
-5Likes
Like

Posted 23 July 2014 - 07:11 PM

Ive put a lot of thought into this area, and ive got this beginning self programming system going, but when it comes to making the sensors, you realize once youve got those, you dont really need to make them self program, you just code the animation yourself manually.
 
a) stereo cameras make the most awesome sensors for hardwired automonous death bots, and you can make them now if you are really that bloody crazy.  but then its a program in control.
 
b) telepathic control of robots.  this makes decent full body virtual reality possible (in a chair), and alot of other things.   its still in its infancy alot of places, maybe not everywhere, and is a big part of the future. will be big for movies, lots of things.  any invasive method i am completely against.
I always wondered how well you could spacially match a kinect up to an eeg, with a net. smile.png
 
Imagine the "robo bank robber" and thats what he used to do. hehehe
 
 
c) self programming robots have to most potential (only in the end) for all terrain, and carrying out an actual possibly somewhat interesting conversation, that other robots would be too predictable,  they are slightly more unpredictable. they are the smartest ones, out of them all.  and thats the one i want to make.  but the only interactivity it has is just treating you like a foe at this stage, no real communication happening, and it goes really slow.

Edited by rouncer, 23 July 2014 - 07:19 PM.


Sponsor:

#2 IADaveMark   Moderators   -  Reputation: 2513

Like
2Likes
Like

Posted 23 July 2014 - 10:36 PM

Dude... you just need to stop. Seriously.


Dave Mark - President and Lead Designer of Intrinsic Algorithm LLC

Professional consultant on game AI, mathematical modeling, simulation modeling
Co-advisor of the GDC AI Summit
Co-founder of the AI Game Programmers Guild
Author of the book, Behavioral Mathematics for Game AI

Blogs I write:
IA News - What's happening at IA | IA on AI - AI news and notes | Post-Play'em - Observations on AI of games I play

"Reducing the world to mathematical equations!"

#3 rouncer   Members   -  Reputation: 291

Like
-3Likes
Like

Posted 23 July 2014 - 11:24 PM

everything I said is a fact, your not ready to accept.


Edited by rouncer, 23 July 2014 - 11:37 PM.


#4 Álvaro   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 13688

Like
5Likes
Like

Posted 23 July 2014 - 11:27 PM

When the new reputation system was established, I complained about giving points for idiotic things, like logging in. So here's a perfect example of the undesirable consequences of that: rouncer's profile reports a reputation score of "356 Good". If this individual deserves a "Good" score, who doesn't? What is the score supposed to be used for?

[The thread is worthless, so I don't feel bad using it for something else. Well, a little bad because what I am talking about has nothing to do with AI.]

#5 rouncer   Members   -  Reputation: 291

Like
-1Likes
Like

Posted 24 July 2014 - 12:22 AM

heres an explanation of a self programming robot

 



#6 BitMaster   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 4275

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 24 July 2014 - 01:36 AM

When the new reputation system was established, I complained about giving points for idiotic things, like logging in.


I have to fully agree. That, getting/losing points for voting and the dumb linear scaling. Actually, the only thing the new reputation system does better is allowing you to tie a vote to a specific post. Everything else about the reputation system just feels like a downgrade.
Another good example in the same area is that phil<somenumber> guy who gives Spiro heart attacks. He had some 700+ reputation points when I last saw him and he *never* had any positive or constructive influence on this forum. He hadn't even learned to ask questions in all that time.

#7 rouncer   Members   -  Reputation: 291

Like
-3Likes
Like

Posted 24 July 2014 - 03:38 AM

i just got a new idea!

 

What if you nanotube radioed your digital brain cells together, gets over the wiring problem, youd need enough units to run multiple tests at once.


Edited by rouncer, 24 July 2014 - 03:48 AM.


#8 jbadams   Senior Staff   -  Reputation: 19072

Like
2Likes
Like

Posted 24 July 2014 - 04:19 AM

rouncer:

 

We've tried to give you a chance here, and you've been given suggestions for posting more constructively on multiple occasions, but to be honest this topic is still nothing but largely incoherent rambling.

 

Your topics constantly devolve into arguments or simply trail off with no useful discussion ever taking place, and you're not even getting anything out of it yourself... you sometimes reply as if you don't even realise that the overwhelming majority of replies to your topics are simply complaining that you're still here or poking fun rather than actually trying to discuss anything with you.

 

We really make an effort to try to allow anyone who wants to participate to be a part of our community, but unfortunately in your case it's just not working out and we can't continue to have you disrupting our community indefinitely with no signs that you're even trying to participate constructively.

 

 

Sorry, but consider this your last chance -- any more of these pointless rambling topics will result in you being removed from our community permanently.  At this point I would normally give advice on how you can be more constructive, but it's already been given repeatedly -- look over some of those older posts if you would like to try.

 

 

Topic closed.



#9 jbadams   Senior Staff   -  Reputation: 19072

Like
2Likes
Like

Posted 24 July 2014 - 04:49 AM


If this individual deserves a "Good" score, who doesn't? What is the score supposed to be used for?

You're right, those badges were set to inappropriate values -- I've adjusted them to be better suited to our current system.  They now display "learning" for members with 100-1000 reputation points, "good" for members with 1000-5000 points, and "excellent" for those with more than 5000 points.  Members with less than 100 points only have their score displayed with no additional label.

 

If you'd like to discuss the reputation system in more detail feel free to start a topic in the CS&I forum or send me a PM -- we're happy to listen to suggestions, or even if you'd just like to vent.






Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS