Hello,<div><br></div><div>I sent this email to Ton, and he directed me to this mailing list. My idea is simple - to create a Blender robotics side of Blender. I say this because I find Blender to complement this notion that I had very well - both appeal to the same things, and both suit and complement each other perfectly. I cannot call this a project because it would be too simplistic to call it so. It's thus better to call it a notion - because that is what it is, a movement, in its most basic (and only) form. </div>
<div><br></div><div><div>Dear Ton,</div><div><br></div><div>All in all I believe this to be very exciting. The beauty of it is that it goes hand in hand with what you are trying to do. Believe it or not, this has the potential of changing our world into one which does not need to thrive in capitalism in order to survive. This complements, if not augments and extends, what you are trying to do with the free and open source model, which it will help immensely, as you can imagine why.</div>
<div><br></div><div>You have seen the power that free and open source development has, with Blender gaining strides with each day that passes.</div><div><br></div><div>It only takes good will to do this, of which you have plenty. I developed this notion because I believe that the free and open source model relates significantly with a society that does not need to depend on money in order to survive. I contacted you because I am impressed with what you have been able to do with Blender, given too that I am a user and also because I see a relation between Blender and the notion of a free and open source robot worker. Please give it serious thought. In order to thrive, this project or ambition needs a centralized direction, and you are the one that is best capable of providing that, given how successfully, enthusiastically and transparently you have managed Blender. </div>
<div><br></div><div>There are many of us that wish that technology be used for the good of all, and this along with Blender are going to be the most important developements in human history, if I may take it lightly. Please tell me what you think of it.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Thank you for your help and consideration,</div><div><br></div><div>- Thomas</div><div><br></div><div>Free and Open Source General Robot Worker</div><div><br></div><div>Layout and guideline</div><div><br>
</div><div>Two principal tenets of one fundamental principal, movement:</div><div><br></div><div>1) Actuators </div><div><br></div><div>2) Programming</div><div><br></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>1) Image recognition </div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>2) Sound waves - sonar, echolocation </div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span></div>
<div>Objective is to minimize recognition errors in relation to 3d model, in order to aid its movements as well as possible.</div><div><br></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>- Create and recreate 3d map / model continously.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Additional characteristics:</div><div><br></div><div>- Light weight (aluminium, carbon fibre), soft body, moderate carrying and handling loads. All three will help in minimizing unwanted damage due to error. The objective is to ideally make it as least dangerous as possible. </div>
<div><br></div><div>- Programmed through Opencl - parallel programming and computing.</div><div><br></div><div>Challenges that have prevented robots from gaining foothold and that will need to be solved or are in the process of being solved:</div>
<div><br></div><div>1) Actuators - robot needs to be bipedal (with subset of robots being of other types) and with two arms and two hands, which is the most effective and natural of types in relation to movement and nature of work. Actuators need to be gravity-based - need to work with gravity (i.e., unlock/dislodge and lock) and not against it with regards to all of its movements, which is again the most normal and effective way. </div>
<div><br></div><div>Point will be reached soon (through technological subsidies - i.e. moore's law generalized for entire branch of technology) whereby actuators will be good enough in relation to the necessities and nature of work, i.e. "good enough". This point can be reached more quickly through an effective open source technology/design.</div>
<div><br></div><div>2) Battery - assume limitless, point will be reached whereby batteries will be sophisticated and powerful enough to power robot for many hours. Can be solved partially by providing a remote source of energy, i.e. remote vehicle with power generator (through gas, oil) or battery tank which can serve as a recharging base for robot worker.</div>
<div><br></div><div>3) Programming - both dynamic (one branch will be everchanging without regards to improvement, the other continously updating/improving, noting that the two are not mutually exclusive) and static (which is not mutually exclusive with dynamic, assuming that a part of the dynamic side can be considered "almost static", i.e. various degrees of dynamic / static interoperability). There are only two true static parts that are static laws / definitions that do not and cannot be changed or updated by the robot:</div>
<div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>1) Never put in danger other living beings. </div><div><br></div><div><span class="Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre"> </span>2) Always create and recreate 3d map / model so that it is possible to work in the environment in relation to the first law and in relation to not damaging the environment, which is defined as causing any change that is not wanted when performing the task at hand, which ultimately always relates to the first.</div>
<div><br></div><div>4) Computing. The advent of parallel computing through cGPUs has brought the possibility of using many teraflops of computing power without a proportional increase in power usage, heat, space requirements, and cost.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Objectives:</div><div><br></div><div>To replace primary / raw labour</div><div><br></div><div>1) Construction. Houses, buildings, public necessities, and other subsets of construction, some of which may or may not be directly considered to be related to "construction" in the way that it is primarily defined.</div>
<div><br></div><div>2) Raw Material aggregation - mining, extraction, farming.</div><div><br></div><div>3) Agricultural.</div><div><br></div><div>4) Recycling.</div><div><br></div><div>Eventually, to replace all of labour in public service.</div>
<div> </div><div><br></div><div>Challenges to Open source model:</div><div><br></div><div>- Management. General management and direction through internet and website is needed in order to direct and motivate developers. Blender is an example of successful management.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Advantages of Open source model:</div><div><br></div><div>- Unrivalled values and unrivalled motivation. The best of ideas and the best of dedication come from the purest and most virtuous of ideals.</div>
<div><br></div><div>- Number of workers working on a unified (when properly managed) development.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Disadvantages:</div><div><br></div><div>- Difficulty of proper execution, which can be solved through proper and indirectly centralized management - again, Blender is a successful example of proper execution. </div>
<div><br></div><div><br></div><div>Types of work needed and available:</div><div><br></div><div>- Programming</div><div><br></div><div>- Engineering / Design</div><div><br></div><div>--</div><div><br></div><div>Hello Ton,</div>
<div><br></div><div>Thanks for your reply :) Managing Blender must indeed be a very time consuming work, and I understand why you would like to schedule less work so that you can rest more.</div><div><br></div><div>My idea is very simple - creating a free and open source robot worker is not that hard, it only takes good will and motivated people, who are guided by noble virtues and sentiments. </div>
<div><br></div><div>The problem, as I explained, is that for a project like this to be successful, it needs to be directed as well as possible. This could apparently go against the notion of "free and open source", but it does not, because 1) it prevents the project from being fragmented or destroyed (thus, a momentum type of problem, where proper management makes the project gain momentum as greatly and as well as possible) 2) the direction of the project will still be democratic as long as the centralized management is as transparent in what they do as possible.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Blender is as I said, the primary example of proper management. The idea behind this project is to be synergistic with Blender, in all of the intended forms that Blender was conceived to be, which are 1) the program itself 2) the will and community behind it, that are able to make Blender as good as possible (advantages that commercial applications by their nature cannot have). Thus, this project needs to be a subset of what Blender actually is, not merely/only a 3d program, but an all-important device that is able to turn the most noble and thoughtful of dreams into reality. </div>
<div><br></div><div>I see that Blender also hosts a robotics related mailing list. That's great to know :) I'll register and send them them this. </div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div><br></div><div>- Thomas</div>
<div><br></div></div>