I’m a computer, stop all the downloading… (G.I. Joe PSA)
Monday, February 27th, 2006 by AlIn using the scribbler robot, it really becomes apparent how dumb robots are. Everything has to be explained to a robot. There is no room for thinking or adaptation; therefore, the robot is only as good as its programmer. In spite of this, it really is amazing how a robot is able to perform such complicated tasks with such limited capabilities and “intelligence.” I really feel bad for my ELE buddies who have to do car lab.
Although contemporary robots are ostensibly very complex machines, they are still very limited in their abilities. Robots are primarily limited by their programs. The programs can instruct a robot to behave in a particular way, but they cannot teach a robot how to think for itself. Artificial intelligence cannot account for unexpected events that would call upon a robot to act autonomously. Essentially, robots are incapable of understanding; thus they are fundamentally bound to their programs. Another limitation deals with the large amount of energy needed to run a robot. The more complex robots become, the more power they need. The immense size of the power supply needed to operate the robot further limits the machine and what it is capable of achieving. Finally, robots are limited by their programmers. Humans are still not fully aware of the mechanics of thinking. The processes associated with reasoning and learning are still beyond the grasp of many humans and thus cannot be integrated into robotic programs.
In a decade, robots will probably be doing similar things to what they currently do, only more efficiently. Until humans make great strides in their understanding of intelligence, robots will not be able to make huge strides in their abilities. While robots will probably still be used for military purposes, manufacturing, farming, etc., they will probably be performing the same functions only faster and better.
Fundamentally, the “Tower of Babel” dilemma concerns the multitude of incompatible computing languages that are used by programmers throughout the world and the associated problems. In many instances, programming limitations arise when programmers know one computing language and not another. To some extent, pseudocode presents a solution to this problem associated with the “Tower of Babel.” Pseudocode uses standardized English phrases to instruct and direct program behaviors. These phrases are in essence both summaries and consolidated versions of more complex code. It would be possible to assign different computer language codes that perform the same functions to the phrases within pseudocode. In this sense, pseudocode becomes an umbrella language to which all other computer languages could be assigned. Pseudocode would therefore be a universalized language for programming.