<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Future Tech: Spider-bots dial Home</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.opennasa.com/2009/06/24/future-tech-spider-bots-dial-home/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.opennasa.com/2009/06/24/future-tech-spider-bots-dial-home/</link>
	<description>Your NASA, My NASA, OUR NASA</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2011 16:14:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rolando Quintanilla</title>
		<link>http://www.opennasa.com/2009/06/24/future-tech-spider-bots-dial-home/comment-page-1/#comment-45209</link>
		<dc:creator>Rolando Quintanilla</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Aug 2010 04:27:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.opennasa.com/?p=848#comment-45209</guid>
		<description>I know about the latency issues.  I did the calculation a little after I wrote the article :-&#124; .  The latency issue is not as bad with the moon though.  

I really like the idea of people getting points.  I bet you could even charge people to take complete control of a bot for some amount of time.  

Thanks for helping the idea evolve.  I like evolving ideas.  

R</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know about the latency issues.  I did the calculation a little after I wrote the article <img src='http://www.opennasa.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_neutral.gif' alt=':-|' class='wp-smiley' />  .  The latency issue is not as bad with the moon though.  </p>
<p>I really like the idea of people getting points.  I bet you could even charge people to take complete control of a bot for some amount of time.  </p>
<p>Thanks for helping the idea evolve.  I like evolving ideas.  </p>
<p>R</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew</title>
		<link>http://www.opennasa.com/2009/06/24/future-tech-spider-bots-dial-home/comment-page-1/#comment-45208</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Aug 2010 03:37:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.opennasa.com/?p=848#comment-45208</guid>
		<description>I hate to be a dream assassin but real-time remote control will be impossible unless you can make light travel faster than, well, light.  Depending on the orbital positions of the planets, you&#039;re going to have ping times up to 40 minutes between Earth and Mars.  You may find this article interesting:

http://kotaku.com/5333020/latency-makes-multiplayer-a-real-bitch-on-mars

Space robots must be fairly autonomous to be able to do much of anything.  They receive high-level objectives from Earth and then do a lot of their own problem-solving to carry out their orders:  navigate to these coordinates, take some samples, etc...  They have to be able to negotiate some really challenging terrain and make a lot of decisions independent of human input.  So these spider bots will need some serious brains on board if they&#039;re to be of any use in space.

Your idea of publicly accessible space exploration may still be possible, though, through virtualization technologies like Google Earth.  Robots could be guided collectively by thousands of online participants identifying interesting features to examine more closely.  Low-res terrain models and texture maps would be provided by fly-overs.  Online participants could pilot a virtual vehicle across this low-res surface, much like a video game.  But collectively, their decisions could provide guidance cues to small swarms of robots which could navigate ahead to fill in more detail.  It still wouldn&#039;t be anywhere close to real-time with round-trip latency up to 40 minutes, but the purpose is exploration, not entertainment.  Nevertheless, there could be objectives, such as searching for water ice or other resources, finding locations suitable for building a base, gathering data for scientific research, etc...  Points could be awarded to the online volunteer explorers proportional to their relative contributions in guiding the robots to meet these objectives.  I think that would be pretty damn entertaining, and I&#039;d feel proud to participate in real science rather than a mindless game.

Anyway, thanks for your ideas.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hate to be a dream assassin but real-time remote control will be impossible unless you can make light travel faster than, well, light.  Depending on the orbital positions of the planets, you&#8217;re going to have ping times up to 40 minutes between Earth and Mars.  You may find this article interesting:</p>
<p><a href="http://kotaku.com/5333020/latency-makes-multiplayer-a-real-bitch-on-mars" rel="nofollow">http://kotaku.com/5333020/late.....ch-on-mars</a></p>
<p>Space robots must be fairly autonomous to be able to do much of anything.  They receive high-level objectives from Earth and then do a lot of their own problem-solving to carry out their orders:  navigate to these coordinates, take some samples, etc&#8230;  They have to be able to negotiate some really challenging terrain and make a lot of decisions independent of human input.  So these spider bots will need some serious brains on board if they&#8217;re to be of any use in space.</p>
<p>Your idea of publicly accessible space exploration may still be possible, though, through virtualization technologies like Google Earth.  Robots could be guided collectively by thousands of online participants identifying interesting features to examine more closely.  Low-res terrain models and texture maps would be provided by fly-overs.  Online participants could pilot a virtual vehicle across this low-res surface, much like a video game.  But collectively, their decisions could provide guidance cues to small swarms of robots which could navigate ahead to fill in more detail.  It still wouldn&#8217;t be anywhere close to real-time with round-trip latency up to 40 minutes, but the purpose is exploration, not entertainment.  Nevertheless, there could be objectives, such as searching for water ice or other resources, finding locations suitable for building a base, gathering data for scientific research, etc&#8230;  Points could be awarded to the online volunteer explorers proportional to their relative contributions in guiding the robots to meet these objectives.  I think that would be pretty damn entertaining, and I&#8217;d feel proud to participate in real science rather than a mindless game.</p>
<p>Anyway, thanks for your ideas.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rolando Quintanilla</title>
		<link>http://www.opennasa.com/2009/06/24/future-tech-spider-bots-dial-home/comment-page-1/#comment-23031</link>
		<dc:creator>Rolando Quintanilla</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 02:27:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.opennasa.com/?p=848#comment-23031</guid>
		<description>Nick, what do you have in mind?  

I looked into the Cubesat and that would be a good way of increasing bandwidth.  Also, the spider-bot could be made to fit within the Cubesat dimensions, to minimize launch costs.  

How would we partner with the GLXP?  We could use this technology to expand the Google Mars and Moon service, with time dependent pictures people can explore.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nick, what do you have in mind?  </p>
<p>I looked into the Cubesat and that would be a good way of increasing bandwidth.  Also, the spider-bot could be made to fit within the Cubesat dimensions, to minimize launch costs.  </p>
<p>How would we partner with the GLXP?  We could use this technology to expand the Google Mars and Moon service, with time dependent pictures people can explore.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: skytland</title>
		<link>http://www.opennasa.com/2009/06/24/future-tech-spider-bots-dial-home/comment-page-1/#comment-22988</link>
		<dc:creator>skytland</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2009 02:25:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.opennasa.com/?p=848#comment-22988</guid>
		<description>Rolando, I think this is the start of an interesting idea.  I&#039;m not sure we necessarily need to wait for NASA to develop the technology or infrastructure to allow anyone to explore space via something like this.  What about leveraging all the cubesat&#039;s being developed or maybe even partner with the GLXP?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rolando, I think this is the start of an interesting idea.  I&#8217;m not sure we necessarily need to wait for NASA to develop the technology or infrastructure to allow anyone to explore space via something like this.  What about leveraging all the cubesat&#8217;s being developed or maybe even partner with the GLXP?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

