quote:
Originally posted by Art
Stephen is a remarkable CG artist / animator.
I think it has been a common goal among digital
designers to emulate human looks, emotion, etc.
for many years by way of their creations.
Sure, and some good roboticists do that too. As one of the first professional 3D web animators, I understand that computer art is largely about human expression and therefore uses human images.
But most artists aren't about limitations. Free expression almost requires breaking out of previous molds.
There are people who buy a car based solely on looks, but most want the car to actually work. I don't have an objection to a robot also looking good, and I don't have a fear of robots replacing humans - but I also am not trapped in an outdated humaniform robot fixation.
Making a robot like a human is a limitation. I can't believe the number of man-hours and dollars that must have gone into making robots look "more human" while not developing, or even removing, other, more robotic features.
I believe it's species-ist, and may be based on the same frankenstein complex Art referred to - de-evolving a robot into a psuedohuman removes enough
Robot-like abilities that they are no longer a threat. They are merely a more compliant human.
This may say more about the attitudes of humans towards humans than some may find comfortable.
I want the most capable robot I can get, I want it to take jobs and positions away from me, so I can move into new and different jobs and positions. But if I limit robots to pretend-humans, I must, at some point, limit what that robot might otherwise be able to do.
As an artist, I don't like limitations. Fortunately, I have some abilities other than art, which allow me to expand the actual functions of Hal, not just dress up the eye-candy.
I guess that makes me closed minded.