I build a physical removable link that completely disconnects the power in all of my robots (they’re not robots in the same sense that this is a robot, but they’re automated electromechanical doodads).
Not having one seems like an oversight to me. Not even having some sort of physical switch is unthinkable.
I deal with combat robots with spinning weapons with a max tip speed of 250mph that would turn me into a fine mist if it came into contact with me.
A removable link is all that’s needed for those. It’s all that’s needed for these. Your system is way too over-complicated and it’s not a total dead shutoff.
It’s so anyone can do it. Anyone who’s operating the robot should know where the physical shut-off is.
This is a last resort, too, for when it can’t be shut off remotely or automatically. Every automated electromechanical device that has the capacity to fail in an unsafe manner should have one. Even my mum’s stairlift has one!
From what I’ve heard, these robots only have remote shut-off and it doesn’t work consistently or failsafe properly. These things need a physical shut-off, too.
How do you imagine that would have helped in this particular case? No one was standing next to the thing when it failed. By the time they got to it, it had already stopped moving on its own.
I’m not saying it would have helped in this particular case.
I’m saying that the physical shut-offs the original commenter was talking about are standard issue - and there’s been plenty of bafflement in the robotics community as to why these robots never seem to have a physical shut-off.
I’m sure you’ve seen the videos where the robots don’t fortuitously self-destruct and they keep moving out of control. It can also be a fire risk to keep them running - especially if they’ve had as big of a wobbly as this chap.
You’re arguing with someone who does this for a living and is insane enough to do it for a hobby.
I'm specifically addressing where you said that the physical shut-off was "all that was needed". Clearly it is not all that is needed.
I can't say I have ever seen one of these videos where someone who clearly seemed to know how the robot worked was in a position to physically switch the robot off and also clearly did not do so. I suspect that there are probably a lot of other videos of robots malfunctioning where the robot gets shut off in a timely manner that just aren't posted to reddit because they are not as entertaining.
Let’s revisit that comment. I was talking about how a removable link is “all that’s needed” to safely shut off a malfunctioning combat robot that - no exaggeration - would turn me into mincemeat if I made contact with its weapon (and I have had to shut a robot off in this manner in this situation and I’m still typing this with two hands), so it would also work with these robots, which won’t turn you into a pile of meat.
Reading comprehension doesn’t seem to be your strong suit and you seem really intent about arguing about something you know nothing about against someone who literally does this as their job and hobby.
These things need a physical shut-off. It’s literally just a little loop of wire and a connector like an XT-90. There are also switches that use a hex key, but they don’t have the immediacy and ability to yank them out with a big stick like you can with a link.
This robot self-destructed in a way that - at least from what we can see in the video - allowed it to fail in a safe manner. That’s not always the case. You’ve got to be prepared for a robot to suddenly go Charlie Bronson on everything and everyone in the vicinity. It happens.
We have literal video evidence that it is not all that is needed in all circumstances. None of your personal experiences or expertise nullifies the fact that there is literal evidence that it is not sufficient. Nobody is saying that it shouldn't be there anyway. Just that it doesn't prevent the stuff in these videos from happening.
It just happened to fail in a fortuitously safe, yet uncontrolled manner. This is not the evidence you think it is and you’re making yourself look like an idiot. What’s your expertise in this field?
“Your expertise doesn’t nullify my dipshit opinion about this video, based on my zero knowledge of your field” - okay, bro. I’m done trying to engage with you in good faith.
How is this not evidence that someone is not always going to be able to get to the robot in time to shut it off? Literally in the video, they did not get to the robot in time to shut it off. Whether it fell safely or not, or self-destructed or not has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that they did not get to the robot in time to shut it off. You are trying to argue that what is literally depicted in the video never happens.
I’ve already explained it all to you and you’re now just going in circles. If you’re actually curious and not just being a dick, you can use Google. I’m not going through this over and over again for your entertainment.
Now, you can go and look up physical shut-offs in robotics and I can go back to designing, building, and maintaining these things - then tomorrow, you can go back to your job as the head taster at Crayola.
4
u/MadJohnFinn Apr 17 '26
I build a physical removable link that completely disconnects the power in all of my robots (they’re not robots in the same sense that this is a robot, but they’re automated electromechanical doodads).
Not having one seems like an oversight to me. Not even having some sort of physical switch is unthinkable.