Do robots need heads?

Baxter from Rethink Robotics
Baxter from Rethink Robotics

Are you curious about what your future robotic assistants will look like?

My bet is that by the time you buy your very first robotic butler, it will have a friendly head on it that moves. In fact, it would be a good idea to make robots with heads if they are intended to share spaces and objects with people. That’s because the head is a really expressive part of our body we naturally use (a lot) to convey essential information to each other.  Robots will need to do the same if they are going to hang out with us soft-tissued human beings at our homes and offices.

For example, when people are attending to something, they tend to be looking at the thing they are attending to. People also look at the direction they are headed when they walk, and make eye contact when they talk. People nod with their head when they want to show agreement about what is being said. Without these nonverbal cues from the head interacting with each other would be much more difficult, because we wouldn’t know what each other are doing.

Rodney Brooks, a pioneer in robotics and now Chairman and CTO of Rethink Robotics, had this in mind when he built Baxter. Although Baxter’s arms are as bulky-looking as its traditional industrial robotics predecessors, one of the innovative components of it is the fact that it features a moving head that makes its interaction with not-so-trained users very intuitive

If robots are to do meaningful things around us in a safe manner, it’s essential that we know what the robot is attending to, where it is headed, and what it is about to do – a lot of which a robot head can help with. That way, we won’t have to be a roboticist to know when it is safe to be around a robot holding on to a giant knife to make you cucumber salad.

This post was originally published by Read up more about what other experts say about this topic here.

One comment

  1. 1) I haven’t fully switched as I play a lot of games and most of them are not sprpouted by WINE, but I started playing around with Linux over a year ago and setup a more permanent workstation a few months ago.2) Windows XP (choice was go vista or get into something else)3) ArchLinux, after experimenting with more user-friendly environments, I decided a minimalist desktop was the way for me. Arch allows me to be very much in control of everything and I’ve setup a desktop with the awesome window manager (tiling window managers FTW!). I really like Arch as well because it uses an rc.conf file similar to BSD systems.4) Linux is so much more friendly to developers (despite Steve Ballmer yelling it at the top of his lungs over and over), everything is open source so you’re able to learn from other peoples code, documentation is abundant, and the CLI allows you to do so much more than the Windows CMD Prompt. Setting up webservers is easy and OpenSSL is fantastic (unless you’re using Debian XD). I learned so much just by setting up a dedicated server in my closet. Basically what this all comes down to is just how much I’ve learned from using Linux and tinkering with the insides. I don’t know of any other environment where I could get the same hands on experience.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s