Hacker News Reader

Comment by ijs | Hacker News Reader

Bot & Dolly is hiring: http://www.botndolly.com/jobs

They're a good company to work for. Less nerdy than 99% of robotics companies.

I'm not sure how 'less nerdy' would be a plus for a robotics company, but good to have a positive review of the place nonetheless. Do you work there?

(tlb is Trevor Blackwell, a partner at YCombinator and founder/CEO of Anybots. It's safe to guess that he knows the field.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trevor_Blackwell

Just guessing, but for me it's about the audience. Software in the 70s and 80s was very nerdy. With the rise of the web, it got less so, driven by the need to reach consumers and the influence of print design. In the last decade, a lot of tech is downright chic, and succeeds because of that. Look at the iPod and the iPhone, for example.

I think robotics is coming up on a similar transition. For years it was 99% research projects and industrial uses: pure nerdery. But Bot & Dolly is selling to Hollywood, and is very slickly marketed. Aesthetics are starting to really matter.

Whoa. It's worth checking out their video "Box":

http://www.botndolly.com/box

Gorgeous.

This is the most amazing thing I've seen in a really long time.

We can see the two robots manipulating the rectangular screens, and infer one positioning the camera. What I'm trying to figure out, is if there are at least two additional robots positioning the projectors that light the screens, or if they just transformed the animation and the projectors are kept in basically the same place as the camera.

I don't know. In terms of excitement and creativity I think we're slowly catching up to the end of the 90s.

I don't work there, I just know them.

Bot & Dolly is half robot technology, half creative consultancy and they have a very cool office in SF.

Look at the speed, dexterity & flow of the robotic boom arm in this demo reel, WOW. Thats pretty much impossible for a human camera op to throw a camera about like that.

http://www.botndolly.com/kungfu-proof-of-concept

The question I've always had in regards to Bot & Dolly - how are they ensuring safety? Industrial robot arms are notoriously unforgiving and kill people every year. Putting untrained actors in close proximity with arms without some sort of safety system seems like madness. I hope I'm wrong though, since the company seems to be bringing robots to an interesting new place.

"Industrial robot arms are notoriously unforgiving and kill people every year"

um, how many people are actually killed by industrial robots? while the robots provide what economic value?

Only three reported deaths last time I checked. One in 1979, one in 1984 and another in 2009. Pretty sure more deaths occur from other equipment than that, every year even.

This is untrue, but it is hard to get international numbers.

In the US alone, it is about one death a year, purely by OSHA standards. This doesn't include things like "struck by robot, died three days later due to brain haemorrhage".

OSHA: https://www.osha.gov/pls/imis/AccidentSearch.search?acc_keyw...

Economist: 77 accidents with industrial robots in 2005 alone - http://www.economist.com/node/7001829

Research paper: 103 self reported and survey responded by 1995 - http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hfm.4530050304/ab...

Interesting, thanks. I went back and found the article I had read about this awhile back and I guess it was specific data about robot arms and probably wasn't entirely comprehensive:

http://hcri.brown.edu/2013/08/29/could-your-robot-hurt-you-p...

Edit: one of those are a stretch calling it a "robot" A conveyor belt is a robot? Also, 33 results for robot, but 108 for Forklift and 11 for microwave, is it really all the much more dangerous than any other equipment? Should we ban microwaves (deliberate hyperbole, I realize those weren't deaths)?

I can't read the economist article "reached your reading limit" :(

77 accidents- I assume that's injuries, not deaths, right?

I would consider the OSHA count as incomplete for the reason you say- but I doubt there is more accurate data.

Right now I'd say the numbers look reasonable to not justify preventing the entertainment industry from using robot automation in movie making alongside actors (I think that's what was being suggested?).

Injuries. Death numbers are far harder to find.

The more pressing concern with putting actors in the mix is that they are necessarily untrained or poorly trained participants.

Most of these accidents happen with trained personnel.

I'm not saying that Bot and Dolly shouldn't do what they're doing. I'm just interested in what their safety procedure is to prevent accidents. "Don't get hit" is not a procedure.

Some. Some.

Both of these questions need more specificity - the former in the data available and the latter in what you're considering value.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com