Scientists use dead spider as gripper for robot arm, label it a 'Necrobot' Scientists from Rice University in Texas have used a dead spider as an actuator at the end of a robot arm – a feat they claim has initiated the field of "necrobotics". "Humans have relied on biotic materials – non-living materials derived from living organisms – since their early ancestors wore animal hides as clothing and …
I was thinking same thing. Sure it's just an insect but it was a living thing, spiders have shown basic intelligence and some simple problem solving. So we abuse them into death and then continue to abuse a living thing's corpse just to prove a point.
Nothing new I guess, we've always been a nasty, abusive little species when we want to be and hence why the earth is now in such a bloody awful state. No, I'm not a green dippy hippy, just a realist.
"Ever notice that there are no vegan ecosystems on Earth? "
True. On the other hand, predator/prey ecosystems are usually self-balancing. If the predators grow too numerous and eat too much of the prey, the predators starve and die back and the prey species recovers. That part of it doesn't really happen where humans are the predator. Famine due to "over preying" or other reasons in one part of the world means we ship food and humanitarian aid from other bits of the world to maintain the numbers of predators.
"We, as a group, haven't reached the point of world-wide famine.
Yet. It'll happen, because humans as a group are incredibly stupid."
Global population is expected to peak within next 50 years and then start to decline. Smaller families are a natural by-product of more wealth. China's population is already shrinking, and as other countries in SE Asia and, eventually, Africa, grow richer they will follow suit. Global population is predicted to peak at 9-10 billion.
Yes, humans as a group can behave in incredibly stupid ways, but humans can also be resourceful, clever, and occasionally do some pretty awesome things. So it's a bumpy road, but I don't think it will ever come to world-wide famine.
Not that I'd be around by that time, anyway
Some developed countries are electing governments who are actively pursuing policies to increase their populations. Theocracy is on the rise. Their ideology often mandates that they must multiply their group members - and in some cases they deny other groups the right to limit their reproduction.
Like beetles with electronics glued to the heads, electrodes implanted and using them as remote control robot
...or dogs used as anti-tank weapons during WW2, the Acoustikitty from days of cold war espionage, Blue Peacock (the chicken-powered tactical nuclear landmine)....we have something of a track record when it comes to exploiting animals beyond the food chain.
"I don't think they'd like the smell."
Clearly you are not a cat person. They tend to like the most foul smelling cat-foods and turn their noses up at the one we think smells almost passable. Mine like a bit of fish, chicken or even "gourmet" cat food now and then, but much prefer the foul smelling, cheap stuff as their daily "go to".
I should add that Skogkatts seem to be in the middle of inheriting the Earth. Some have a proto-opposable thumb, which allows them to descend from trees head-first, among other interesting things ... but operating the can-opener doesn't seem to be one of them. At least the ones that live here haven't demonstrated this skill. Yet. Not that I know of, anyway ...
This is getting silly.
Pet food companies now use pouches - 'cos even our brightest boffins in two millennia have yet to build a can opener that can reliably fully open cans. They are almost there but they always fail about 3/4 way round. Designed to exposing a nice cutting edge to thwart further efforts by hand and thumb.
Or alternatively spend two hours every fortnight boiling a chicken, removing all the meat, cutting it up, putting it in little jars, adding juices from the pot and then freezing it, taking out one pot a day and microwaving it for the furry little bugger?
Yes, we do go to extraordinary lengths for our feline overlords.
'cos even our brightest boffins in two millennia have yet to build a can opener that can reliably fully open cans
I actually bought a can opener whose principle was unknown to me until I saw this excellent video and it works astonishingly well.
As a matter of fact, it works so well that it allows you to open a can and then re-fit the lid in such a fashion that you could use it to prank someone - it's hardly visible the can has been opened.
I call that innovative, and if it wasn't for most cans now having a pull tab I suspect I would be using it a lot on account of far better engineering. And I still might, because a tab-opened can cannot be re-closed - opened with this can-opener it can.
"I actually bought a can opener whose principle was unknown to me until I saw this excellent video and it works astonishingly well."
Well, that's 20 minutes of my life I'll never get back. TWENTY whole MINUTES about a tin opener FFS! But it was weirdly and strangely fascinating. Somehow, I feel cheated and satisfied at the same time. You git!!
I have one of those can openers which my wife bought at some point, probably just to have one. We mostly buy fresh food or jars, and the cans we get have pull-tops or the 'corned-beef-tin' key opening. First time I came to use it (no instructions of course), I had to work it out, and it was also weird as even while opening, it doesn't look as though anything is happening right until the whole lid is off.
But once started with it, I would never go back to a traditional opener, the way it leaves no sharp edges at all and the lid doesn't fall in is a great improvement on the old kind.
The 20-min vid is kind of overkill though :)
> the way it leaves no sharp edges at all and the lid doesn't fall in is a great improvement on the old kind
Is the top of the can not sharp though? In the sense of covering a half-used can with clingfilm to put into the fridge and finding the can edge cuts through it?
> and the lid doesn't fall in
You need to practice your edging technique: take a traditional opener, work around the rim and just as everything is about to let go - hold back!
Leave the last 2mm and this makes a hinge that stops the lid falling in. When the can is empty, you just fold the lid down into the can and the sharp edges don't slice your trash bags open when emptying the kitchen bin.
The cans I hate are the ones with a ring pull - you have to remove the whole lid; the edges are razor sharp; it needs a lot of force so risks slopping the contents; and if your fingers are even slightly arthritic you have to buy a helper gadget from a disability shop. :-(
[Icon: an example of produce that comes in cans that no one has a problem opening.]
You are doing it wrong as well!
start opening the normal way, but when ca. 2 cm ( 4/5") is left uncut, "jump" the can-opener ca. 5 mm (1/5 "), and continue opening until ca. 5 mm is left. This not only yields the desired "hinge, the last opening action will lever the can open for you, sparing you a lot of fishing around for the lid.
"Is the top of the can not sharp though?"
Surprisingly, no, though I am unsure of what sort of voodoo they work to make it so. The edge of the lid is also not sharp. I mean, neither is something you would want to push against with force, but they're blunt enough to rule out painful and bloody accidents. They also aren't sharp enough to slash any garbage bags (though in my case they anyway go to can recycling bin, no bag required)
"You need to practice your edging technique..."
That's in fact what I used to do when using a traditional opener (including the bit about levering the lid edge up with the last twist of the opener as suggested by the next reply from LogicGate), but with the new type it's far easier.
"The cans I hate are the ones with a ring pull"
Seconded!! (these can still be opened with a can opener, usually better and safer than with the ring pull)
I bought one of those from a bargain bin a few years ago. But it didn't come with any instructions and I couldn't figure out how to work it.
Now I wish I hadn't thrown it out.
The problem with most can openers is that the traction cog is made of cheap metal that is too soft and the teeth don't grip the rim of the can so it just wheelspins.
My original Leatherman Super Tool has a P-38-like can opener which works surprisingly well. The length of the tool adds a lot if extra leverage. As others have commented, the trick is to not quite cut all the way around. At the last moment the lid tends to pop up by itself.
The one from the video looks good, though. I may have to get one.
"utterly reliant"
Nonsense. Your common feline house pet can easily return to the wild, and far, far easier than your common-or-garden libertarian can. Or most other people, for that matter. (Why is it that "preppers", AKA "survivalists", are always the first to bitch about the government not helping in a disaster?)
They pointed out pretty clearly the benefits - basically 'growing' a robot appendage far more effective and far far cheaper than anything we can make.
As far as cruelty, how is this different than than thousands/millions of fruit flies which are farmed specifically to be used in tests? For that matter, we are being told that locusts or other creepy crawlies are a great alternative to meat and that means billions of the things will be grown and killed. Nobody is going to individually euthanize them.
If it were a million spiders being killed to extract some some of chemical, nobody would care. But show us a single spider on video and the fact we're reanimating its corpse we suddenly get up in arms (the spider doesn't care what we do with its corpse).
Many of us routinely kill spiders or wasps we see in our houses and we don't analyse the ethics. Somewhat hypocritical to lambast the scientists doing it for an actual purpose.
Exploitation is a function of perceived benefit.
If the video was of a spider manipulating an organic cornea or performing open heart surgery on a premature infant it would be hailed as a civilization changing, if weird, development.
Everybody would be pontificating on the potential of lady bugs for melanoma treatment and stag beetles for tubal ligation. But it’s yanking a thru-hole component from a breadboard and people can’t see beyond that.
They pointed out pretty clearly the benefits - basically 'growing' a robot appendage far more effective and far far cheaper than anything we can make.
It's obviously cheaper, and lots more fun, to make organic intelligent brains the old fashioned way... and yet we spend millions and millions trying to make artificial intelligence. Go figure.
"a bug is something that inserts its mouth arts into you"
Not exactly, although the so-called "true bugs" deploy some kind of sucking as a feeding mechanism (aphids, for example, which don't suck on mammals). There are many other critters colloquially known as "bugs" ... and many other uses of the word "bug" in the English Language. See the etymology[0] of "bug", here:
For the sensible anti-blind-pointy-clicky set, here's the same link:
https://www.etymonline.com/word/bug
[0] Not to be confused with entomology, of course ...
For those who did not watch the videos due to arachnophobia:
https://www.zsl.org/experiences/friendly-spider-programme
"Do you have a spider phobia? Millions of perfectly rational people are terrified of spiders. No matter how much they try to calm themselves, the response remains the same: sweating, nausea, panic, rapid heartbeat and worse. But spiders are harmless and extremely beneficial invertebrates whose survival depends on avoiding such large, lumbering threats as ourselves. Join us for a session with a hynotherapist and zookeeper, and let us help you overcome your fears."*
I have attended the course, and it did work for me, and all but one of the other attendees. The most difficult thing to do was turn up.
If you know (and care about) someone who is arachnophobic in the UK, just get the details and give them to the person, but do not pester them at all. Attending has to be their decision. Tackling an irrational fear is much harder than tackling a rational fear, and takes time, patience and courage.
*Note for Australians: Australian spiders are extremely dangerous and can kill people, it is referring to UK spiders here, which are complete wusses compared to your spiders.
Horse whisperers don't whisper. They speak horse. Likewise, so-called "lion tamers" speak lion. Same for dogs & etc. And yes, the psychology of the animal comes into play. It's not hypnosis, though.
We're human, and have the capacity to understand the critters, but not vice-versa. So it only stands to reason that we learn their lingo if we need/want to tell them what we'd like them to do next.
It's not rocket surgery, people have been domesticating animals for well over ten thousand years.
I have a secret weapon ... In their eyes, I am the biggest, meanest cat in the whole damn valley. I have trained them and they like it that way. Seriously. They think I'm the Boss Cat, which means none of them fight for dominance, and they listen to me, so long as I don't try to make them do anything that is un-catly.
With no yelling or force. Accept nature & gently redirect ... Rule one of animal training.
See spiders same a bees, creepy and annoying but extremely useful in the grand scheme. When I see one, glass, cardboard and out the nearest door. Cant' handle spiders by hand but I can't kill them, they're intelligent and vital creatures for keeping the real pests under control, the bloody useless flies, every fly that gets sucker bone dry by our 8 legged friends, is one less that bothers me in Summer!
It occurs to me that something nice and viscous would increase the lifting ability of the gripper as the entire arm would be full of the stuff.
And the setup time would include spending about three seconds in my house finding a nice big spider, a week to freeze it to death, ten seconds to ram a syringe up its butt and a metric Lady Macbeth's worth of hand washing.
Absolutely NOPE.
I find spiders and they bio-mechanics interesting, I'm even thinking about how to build a giant spider-bot based on that (A project I dubbed Project Nightmare Fuel). But this is just pure unadulterated NOPE. I really don't see the use for something like this. It's not as if we're ever going to breed and kill spiders on an industrial scale to make robot end effectors, nor do I see a dead spider lasting all that long in long term use in that application.
Yeah, although this may look cool, I don't think it actually works out for something which requires longer term usage of such manipulators.
How long before the spider body is too degraded?
How long before the spider's body can't handle the fluid pressure changes (especially since the body will be degrading while in use)?
How difficult is it to change to another spider in the middle of using the manipulator?
Even if you have X number of spare spiders ready to be used, I assume different spider bodies have different capabilities, similar to how some humans can do 50 pull ups, and some will struggle to do even 1. So how are you going to make sure whatever replacement spiders you get are able to be used as required?
And of cos, you going to set up breeding farms for spiders and figure out best way to kill them humanely(or is it spiderally?) while still preserving the body sufficiently enough to be used in this manner?
I think it may be simpler to just build artificial manipulators one time, and be able to use them for a very long time afterwards.
"I think it may be simpler to just build artificial manipulators one time, and be able to use them for a very long time afterwards."
That may well end up being the case, but copying the design of the spider leg might be the best design solution. On the other hand, for very small micro manipulators, it may be cheaper and easier to use dead spider legs, even if only for one off jobs. There may not be all that many applications for something like this where the manipulator needs to work for many 1000's of operations or a period of week, months or years.
"What happens to the feet at the "factory", I don't know."
Processed into animal chow (or chicken stock for humans, but I digress ... ). The bits deemed inedible are usually turned into fertilizer. In the old days most of that stuff was incinerated, but we're a lot more thrifty nowadays.
"But I'm sure they could donate a few for the advancement of science :-)"
Anybody local to them who raises meat birds would be more than happy to help. I've usually got upwards of 20 pounds of feet in the deep-freeze because I'm dead serious, they make great soup. Waste not, want not. However, I can easily find them a few fresher units on demand, if needs be.
"If memory serves, in the US, the feet are considered unsanitary and can't be sold for food unless the chicken never used them"
News to me. The local Sonoma Market and sister-shop Glen Ellen Market both have fresh chicken feet occasionally (special orders welcome). As does the Whole Foods, not that I shop there anymore (I refuse to do business with the amazon shysters). This is in Sonoma, California, which last time I looked was still in the US.
Many restaurants use them by the bucket-load.
"biotic materials – non-living materials derived from living organisms"
As in - wood?
As in - the laser cut plywood used in oh-so-many small robots (well, hobbyist robots at least)?
Or the paper in plotters - which are just robotic draughtsmen. Ok, that is probably stretching the point too far: the robot plotter isn't actually made of paper. Although there are some paper robots, robo-origami using nitinol wire. Aaaaaah, that's taken my mind off spiders.
This post has been deleted by its author
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
