Robots are we?

Back in 2009 I wrote a blog post about robots that I titled, Move over Data. In this post I reflected on what will be the purpose of robots in our world as robotic technology continues to evolve. It was with great delight that I had the opportunity to watch Dr. Cynthia Breazeal on TED Talks as she discusses her work in robotics, and what role she sees robots playing now and in the future.

In a concise presentation, Dr. Breazeal addresses many core issues concerning robots. And judging from the comments in response to the video, it would seem she has triggered both excitement and apprehension when it comes to the purpose of robots in everyday life.

Dr. Breazeal feels that "robots touch something deeply human within us," and she cites some examples that illustrate the connection people have made with robots when they have been assigned a significant role in people's lives. One example is the robot coach that helped people lose weight. Competing against both traditional journal writing and a computer, the robot coach was the most effective when measuring how long people stuck to their weight loss regiment.

Yet this study still begs the question that I explored in my blog entry in 2009. Essentially, the question is what will be the successful role or purpose of the personal robot? In contrast to a computer or a traditional writing journal, the robot coach was the winner in helping people stick to their weight loss program. However, noting the chart that Dr. Breazeal provides during her presentation, it is worth mentioning that the "sticking with it" was still under 55 days. Certainly more than the other two competitors, but how would the robot coach compare to a human coach? I would argue the coach robot would pale greatly.

Now this is not to say that robots cannot be successful in these roles or the other roles that Dr. Breazeal explores in her talk. She asks her audience, "does it matter that it is a robot?" For me, probably yes, but for the younger generations, probably not.

As I listened to her speak of the observations that were made with children and robots, it would seem, somewhat ironically, that the use of robots addresses a basic need for a tactile and active experience. The students are immersed in the situation beyond the traditional application of technology which usually only includes a screen (maybe interactive) and audio. But again, while a younger generation may be excited with the chance to interact with a robot during a story, would they be any less excited and engaged with an entertaining and talented human story teller?

I am not totally convinced that these roles will be the future for robots. I am, however, excited over the work Dr. Breazeal presented and where the evolution of personal robots will take us. It is clear we have come a long way since Elektro, the robot who liked to puff on cigarettes in 1939 and the 40s. But it is, nevertheless, always good to know who is included on the family tree. Perhaps, a new generation of Elektro could be developed, and they could work as smoking cessation coaches.