Robotics: An Interview with Dr. Arthur Harkins
| Pages | 7-15 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/eb047475 |
| Date | 01 January 1983 |
| Published date | 01 January 1983 |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Library & information science |
"A
2001
Report"
Robotics:
An Interview with Dr. Arthur Harkins
[Editor's note: In the following interview Dr.
Arthur Harkins — see last page for biographical
information — responds to questions posed by Dr.
Thomas Surprenant, Library Hi Tech Associate Edi-
tor and Assistant Professor at the University of
Rhode Island Graduate Library School. Harkins
opines that the era of robots is not merely imminent,
in fact it is already with us. The development of the
field of robotics is not Utopian or idealistic but, in-
stead, "90% history." Robotics and its future in li-
brary applications will be one of the four topics
regularly covered by Surprenant in this column.
(For some possible applications of robots in libraries
see "Future Libraries," Wilson Library Bulletin 57,
no.
6 (February 1983): 499-500, 542.) Other topics
to be covered in 2001 are new information tech-
nologies, public policy issues, and technology and
values.
—
NJM]
Surprenant: What is robotics?
Harkins: There are three possible definitions of
robotics. The first, and most important, is a
"reprogrammable system that moves around with
a gripper which acts very much like the human
hand or arm." In this definition, the key word is
"programmable." The second definition is "a
machine or system that does something over and
over again." It is a reprogrammable motion sys-
tem of some type. Now that could mean a con-
veyor belt that could be reprogrammed for speed
or direction. It could also mean that the robot
need not have a gripper. The system could simply
be a flying device, such as a cruise missile, which
is by this definition a robot. A third definition
is even more vague, "any system that moves
around according to a series of preprograms of
some type which may or may not be reprogram-
mable." You start seeing organisms fall under this
definition of robots, and simple systems like
toasters, microwave ovens, and so on. Well the
point is, that the most common definition is the
one that refers to the gripper, or some other
manipulator, attached to a robot computer, a
robotronic computer than can be reprogrammed.
Surprenant: Can you have a robot without having
some kind of a microelectronic connection?
Harkins: Yes, you can. They are called dumb robots.
We're now jumping out of what most people
would call a modern robotics definition. A mod-
ern robotics definition would say you cannot
have a robot without reprogrammability. What
you decide to call a robot is critical, and that's
why the Japanese lead the United States in ro-
bots.
This is disputed by some people. Some call
it a lead on the order of
20:1,
let's say 100,000
or 80,000 to somewhere between
5,000
and
10,000. But other people call it a lead much
much smaller than that because the Japanese
definition of robot extends to dumb systems.
Surprenant: What you're saying, in essence, is that
you don't really feel that the Japanese have that
much of a lead in the more sophisticated types
of robots.
Harkins: Well, my feeling is that the Japanese lead in
robotics is not measured best in terms of the atti-
tude towards robotics they have. It's measured
best in terms of the attitude towards robotics in
Japan. In other words, the Japanese have shown
themselves willing to use the idea of robotics and
bring robots on board much more eagerly than
most Americans, and to me it seems that this is
the best measure of the lead in robotics in Japan
and not, at this point in time, the number of
robots.
Surprenant: Can you identify any cultural or social
reasons why you feel the Japanese are moving in-
to robotics faster than we are?
Harkins: Yes, I think there are a number of reasons.
One is sort of a Zen attitude toward tools in
Japan. Tools are looked on as being extensions
of the person, extensions of the culture, and/or
extensions of the spirit. This means that tools in
Japan have a wider range of meaning than they do
in the United States in the basic sense. In this
country a tool is a tool; it sits there until you use
it. In Japan, a tool is part of your culture in a
more diffuse way. The best book on this subject
for Americans to read would be, of course, Zen
and the Art of Motorcycle
Maintenance
by Rob-
ert M. Pirsig. But the Japanese have already
SUMMER 1983 7
To continue reading
Request your trial