Mitsubishi has announced the availability of their new robot for general public purchase – wakamaru. It is designed to, well, here’s what they say:
“wakamaru” lives in accordance with his own daily schedules as well as those of its owners, and it can update these schedules based on contact with the owner.
Not only does “wakamaru” respond to actions from people like other conventional robots, but it also takes the initiative in speaking to the family based on the information he obtains from contact with the family.
“wakamaru” connects itself to the network to provide necessary information for daily life. It looks after the house while the family is absent, watches out for unusual conditions, and is convenient for the life of family members.
Marketing-speak aside, I think there’s some interesting things being said here.
- The robot is a he
- The robot “lives”
The idea of creating robots capable of interacting with humans on a personal, intimate level has been something discussed in countless Sci-Fi movies (see Bladerunner for a classic). Today’s technology is at a point where there are some serious bucks being poured into making this happen. Sadly we’re seeing a massive influence of modern geek culture on these advancements. For example, the robots’ physical appearance tend to reflect ideals and stereotypes, as seen in this lifelike robot recently unveiled. This robot/android is obviously a female-oriented robot, and it’s creator has taken great care in trying to emulate idealized female characteristics – silicone-smooth skin and the ability to deflect slaps included.
Wakamaru however is not overtly sexualized, but is given the standard technology-related gender of male. I’m not surprised by this at all. A robot will be male (as most technology is) unless it is overtly female. It saddens me that as progress is made we continue to cling to this cliche.
As for Wakamaru “living” according to it’s own “life rhythm”, I think this may be more marketing than anything else. The robot is not able to independently grow in terms of learning new behaviours or skills. But I think that calling into question the entire definition of “life” in this case is blowing the claim out of proportion – it’s a poor choice of a selling point. Naturally I can’t say whether I’m right or wrong here, as I’ve never interacted with Wakamaru, but I don’t think we’re at the point yet where we can consider robots “alive”.