Lifelike Androids "Better than Data"

[Smellincoffee]

Source: http://www.universetoday.com/83970/...d-better-than-star-treks-data/comment-page-1/

Picture

Even though the Star Trek character “Data” was played by a human, this new android might be more life-like. Watch the video, and I think you’ll agree that it is hard to tell (at first) that this is a robot. It’s called Geminoid DK, built by the Intelligent Robotics lab at Osaka University and designed by professor Hiroshi Ishiguro. Just like Data was modeled after his creator Doctor Noonian Soong, the Geminoid DK is created in the likeness of professor Henrik Scharfe of Aalborg University in Denmark. Not sure if it can whistle or if it remembers every fact to which it is exposed, but Geminoid DK has a better hairdo (and beard) than Data, and it can smile.

Great example of "science marches on". They're referring to this android's strikingly familiar appearance as opposed to Data, though I seem to remember Data's visual artificialness being deliberate. The 'better than Data' claim is obviously meant to get headlines, but the amount of nuance in these motor controls is impressive.

 

[Amaris]

That's stupendous! I love it! Yes, the motor control is extraordinary, and I can't wait to see what develops next.

 

[Myasishchev]

Still a little uncanny valleyish, particularly in the hyper-symmetry of its facial expressions, but in a rather charming way.

On the other hand, building a skin job's body's the easy part.

 

[FPAlpha]

Not Data by far.

All that's good is the skin and hair but any makeup artist from the movies can do that.

His movements are extremely mechanical and precise something we humans just aren't. Lifeless eyes, fake smile and most fake eye batting.

However things are improving from year to year and i believe we'll have robots like those from I Robot within our lifetime.. something akin to Data however is still very far off (mainly the AI needed to simulate human behaviour or the ability to process unknown data and situations and come up with a correct solution).

 

[BlobVanDam]

The skin texture and eyes look better than other robotic faces I've seen, but how can you compare a fake robot to a real person who is intentionally wearing makeup to look more fake? Seriously, can anyone point out a single way this is better than a fictional android from the future, aside from having correct coloured skin? What a stupid headline.

The movements were as fake as any other robot I've seen with that obvious clunky motor look. And it's got a few pre-programmed poses. There's nothing there that makes it a full on android.

Again, stupid headline. I'd be more impressed if the headline and story didn't make such a stupid claim. Who could possible mistake this for a real person?

 

[JarodRussell]

Wasn't the Arnold robot they built for Terminator 3 even more lifelike, with better movement?

 

[Shatnertage]

Call me when he starts reciting the thesaurus.

 

[FordSVT]

Still a little uncanny valleyish, particularly in the hyper-symmetry of its facial expressions, but in a rather charming way.

The eyes look dead, which makes him look like an animated dead person. And they still cant get the lips and mouth to look right, nor the fleshy bits in the corner of a person's eyes.

 

[Tyson]

HELLO I AM AWAKE


WHO WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO KILL FOR YOU

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

One expensive toy.

 

[sojourner]

Wasn't the Arnold robot they built for Terminator 3 even more lifelike, with better movement?

I thought T3 used CGI? I know they used CGI for some of the "makeup" showing the metal under Arnie's skin.

 

[JarodRussell]

Wasn't the Arnold robot they built for Terminator 3 even more lifelike, with better movement?

I thought T3 used CGI? I know they used CGI for some of the "makeup" showing the metal under Arnie's skin.

Watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6YHxJpCqMmk#t=2m57s

http://www.markraats.com/T3_001.htm
http://www.markraats.com/T3_002.htm

But I was half kidding actually. Movement of that Gemonoid DK is certainly better (especially since it's automated). For the looks they could get a good make up artist at some point, though, and then it could be incredibly lifelike. Make up and props houses like Stan Winston Studios really could do some charity work by producing extremely lifelike protheses. That would be extremely cool.

 

[CuttingEdge100]

Kind of creepy if you ask me.

 

[KJbushway]

Not too impressed I need to see more than to say this robot is better than data. Yes it doesn't have to wear gold make-up all over its body but on a scale of 1-10 data is 11 and this is a 2.

 

[Timelord79 (he/him)]

Hollywood ought to jump at this. Arctificial stuntmen? God, the things you can do to them without putting anyone in danger....

 

[KJbushway]

It would cost significantly more to create different andriods than it would to buy the services of someone who likes falling from heights.

 

[Avon]

was it designed to replace noel edmonds on deal or no deal?

 

[acappellasaurus]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXPaZzUP5wk

 

[Haggis and tatties]

Wow.....that's is impressive, those little twitches of the mouth it did while looking blankly ahead were really eerie.

 

[23skidoo]

They're definitely getting better in the appearance department, but that clip doesn't show it attempting to speak. That's where most of these "lifelike" androids fall through. Until they're actually able to articulate speech on their own in some way (as opposed to having a speaker inside) - not to mention instigate conversation on non-pre-programmed topics - then I think the Data comparison is a bit premature. Right now it's a puppet, no more.

You can bet someone in Hollywood's looking at this thing, though.

Alex