• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

Why not more Robots?

I guess hackers wouldn't exist in your TU, then.

No, they do but computers have advanced. The "hacker" would have to rip the 'bot apart and replace the H/W. Even now I could design a h/w + s/w system that would require that. Too many people think that just because hackers can defeat poorly designed systems that they can mess with well designed ones without herculean effort.
 
a sohpont can be made responible (and so liable) of its acts, while a robot, accoriding to Shudusham Concords, are not, and the responsability goes to its owner. That alone might make robots unattractive for companies that can have accidents (and that's most companies).

That was my thought at the time when I first read about possible robot use in Traveller. A passenger (with psi powers) boarding a ship might be told that his robot has to be loaded as cargo rather than sit with the passengers. He then uses his psi powers to flatten the steward's head and security is called in to take out the passenger while his robot protects him. It's a bloddy mess.

In Star Wars: The Motion Picture, a bartender tells Luke and Obi that he doesn't serve their kind (pointing at R2-D2 and C3-P0).
 
I am. It was out of date when written.

You are not in the '80s right now. Are you?

Even though I played Traveller in the '80s. I too, had to pretend I was playing in the '70s when it came to using computers in the game. Remember how Lowell Freeman programmed his drones? Those were some EPROMs.
 
No, they do but computers have advanced. The "hacker" would have to rip the 'bot apart and replace the H/W. Even now I could design a h/w + s/w system that would require that. Too many people think that just because hackers can defeat poorly designed systems that they can mess with well designed ones without herculean effort.

I guess we all have different standards for what breaks our belief suspenders depending on our personal knowledge. I have no problem believing in nebulous ultra-technology that can defeat nebulous standard ultra-tech robot designs well enough to explain why robots are rare in my game setting. Or in the OTU for that matter.


Hans
 
Last edited:
I guess we all have different standards for what breaks our belief suspenders depending on our personal knowledge. I have no problem believing in nebulous ultra-technology that can defeat nebulous standard ultra-tech robot designs well enough to explain why robots are rare in my game setting.


Hans

I don't do outright magic IMTU when there is no defining lines like Jump Drive or AG. It gets messy very quickly with players that have IQ's >100.
 
Robotics all have backdoors to them. Hackers know all about them. Even the black boxes in them can be erased after a murder is committed so regular CSI has to be done at the scene to know if the robot was involved.
 
As a referee, my players had robots in two occasions, and in both cases they were to give them access to some skill they lacked as a group: one was an autodoc, as they had no medic among the group and the other was an engineering robot, as they had only one player with engineering and their ship required two engineers.
Just curious, why not just hire NPC crew?
 
I don't do outright magic IMTU when there is no defining lines like Jump Drive or AG. It gets messy very quickly with players that have IQ's >100.

Neither do I. But you haven't demonstrated that your TL7 knowledge is the last word in TL 15 technology. Not to my satisfaction.


Hans
 
I don't have that book. Does it say that Inhibitors and Asimov's laws are used in the OTU?

Yes, it says that Inhibitors are fairly common. It only costs 100 credits to add to a Robot and the Inhibitors can be customized, i.e. IFF System for a Combat Robot to keep it from firing on Friendlies.
 
Just curious, why not just hire NPC crew?

Good question: once due lack of staterooms, the other time player's choice.

In the case of engineers, the ship was a custoum built spy ship not though for a large crew, and they already used double occupancy with a fire team of mercenary (mostly marine) background players, with few space skills (and mostly gunnery).

In the case of the medic, just they choosed that.
 
There are robots all over the OTU - you just don't notice them for what they are.

They are the TL12 vending machines, the TL15 entertainment consoles, the TL10 house control systems, the TL9 manufactories etc (the list could go on).

What you rarely find in the Third Imperium are humanoid robots performing tasks that people can do.

Note that LBB 8 Robots is very poorly worded in places and self contradictory - read the first few pages and notice the definition of AI there then compare with the descriptions later in the book.

Now dig out the JTAS cd and check the robots article. Look at the adventure that included robots (Research Station Gamma).

I full agree with something HG_B said right back on page 1 - AI and AS are totally different things.

By TL 12 in the OTU robots and computers are fully AI capable by today's standards of what AI represents. What they are not is self aware. That requires the Artificial Sentience that doesn't appear until much higher TLs.
 
To throw something in the mix, you might consider the difference between robots and androids (not the Droid of Star Wars as that is a IP/copyright issue. ;) )

Robots are the automated check out cashiers (kind of like you find at Walmart self check out).

Android is the human (animal) looking thing that is patrol the ship, running the flight controls, doing that simple medical procedure cause you can't not stand sitting in the medical coffin robot (auto medic box).

Robots are kind of every where and little thought of until they break. Android are not every where because they do cost more, some places don't like them and some places they are worth more to theives than the rest of your cargo.

Andriod and robots come in 2 flavors of processing, routine and thinking. The thinking kind can learn and adjust the higher (better) the processing material and programing they can actually develop pesonalities until reset.

Most do not bother making a robot super smart unless it is a facilities robot that handles all the general building needs or complex needs.


There are some robots that move around and do things, but the main difference between mobile robots and an android is the android looks like some other living creature.

Just some food for thought in a sense.

Dave Chase
 
Robotics all have backdoors to them.
What is the back door for the little robot dog my granddaughter has?

Input: It senses light, motion and has some touch sensors.

Output: It bounces and spins around. It barks and makes other dog like sounds.

It has no ports, unless you call the battery compartment a port.

There may be a way to take it apart. I'm not going to rip the fur off the body to look for screws.

Most likely there is a hard wired chip that controls everything. It would take equipment probably not currently in existence to open the chip and rewire the transistors and such.

I guess you could rip the dog apart and replace the chip then carefully put it back together. You'd need a similar bot of your own to rip apart and figure out and test on.

That really is hacking.

Perhaps easier to build your own robot to impersonate your target and swap them out?
 
Yes, it says that Inhibitors are fairly common. It only costs 100 credits to add to a Robot and the Inhibitors can be customized, i.e. IFF System for a Combat Robot to keep it from firing on Friendlies.

Oh, that sort of inhibitions. Sure, that's just a matter of programming. And suceptible to subversion. The point of Asimovian robots is that tampering with the Three Laws destroys the robot brain.


Hans
 
Back
Top