Feeds

Hot digital dog: A man’s best friend is still his... K-9

Robots are evolving, but can they yet match the Doctor’s mechanical mutt?

Build a business case: developing custom apps

Doctor Who @ 50 No robot in TV history has enjoyed such renown as K-9, the loyal robotic mutt who was the Fourth Doctor’s companion for a chunk of the late 1970s and early 1980s.

K-9 provided nit-picky comments and generally useless bits of information while serving as a foil for a rather ebullient doctor on their travels. It was so popular there was a massive campaign to keep him on the show when producers planned to drop the character. And the digital doggie earned not one but two spin-offs: K-9 and Company and K-9.

K9 with doctor and assistant

Now that's what I call a companion: kicking back with K-9
Source: BBC

What made K-9 such a clever invention was the creator’s take on one of the oldest relationships in history: a dog and its master, friend and companion. A talking computer from the year 5000, K-9 also emulated biological dogs’ well-recorded characteristics of powerful eyes and hearing with a telescopic eye probe and rotating ear sensors. K-9 also packed a laser in his nose, proving this dog’s bite was considerably worse than his rather high-pitched, pedantic bark.

Yet, even K-9’s fans would admit their beloved robot was a tad clunky. It was a vision of what the show’s creators in the 1970s, working on a low BBC budget and without CGI, thought the future of animal companions would look like. Until the introduction of K-9’s ability to fly, the Doctor’s canine companion was second only to the Daleks in his inability to cope with any random step or set of stairs thrown across his path. He too got around using a set of wheels.

Fast forward to 2013 and robotic companions have evolved considerably in the past 30-odd years, right?

Robots at home and work

Robots are certainly more widespread today than they were in K-9’s time: from manufacturing to the home, systems are building products, cleaning our homes and driving our cars. Never have they been easier to purchase or use.

But while the robots are technologically complex and offer a wider range of features, they haven’t evolved to that level of camaraderie K-9 had, let alone his wicked sense of humour or encyclopaedic mind.

Even in his poor mechanical state, K-9 elicited qualities of a true friend that trump those of perhaps one of his best facsimiles to date — the Sony Aibo, a robotic dog companion-cum-toy introduced by the company in 1999 but discontinued seven years later.

Aibo was one of the earliest examples of robotic artificial intelligence in a consumer product, simulating many canine characteristics. But Aibo didn’t cut it as a K9-style companion.

“Yes, Aibo wags his tail, twitches his ears, gives a little sideways look — but it doesn’t do it in relation to you,” says Nic Hewitt, head of creative marketing for JustSearch and who also co-runs a Doctor Who podcast called The Dirty Whoers. “He’s not a companion. That’s the difference with what our vision of robots are. They should be companions — a part of our lives and not an accessory to our lives. I don’t think we have that now with anything.”

Sony Aibo

Sony’s dead digital dog, Aibo

Hewitt’s sentiment is mostly true, but robot fans and futurologists take heart: scientists are still trying to crack the nut of robotic companions. And there are two schools of thought at work.

In one group, researchers are using animals as models for robots, borrowing their movements, behaviour and physique. The second group of boffins are trying to create companion robots for both the home and the workplace that can live and work alongside humans, providing help where help is needed in tasks that robots can do better than their flesh-and-blood counterparts. In this group, people rather than animals are the model.

While Aibo provided a robotic pet for the home, there now is a bigger and more complex robotic dog that’s been designed for the military that may still not yet have K-9’s charm but can do a lot more heavy lifting — literally.

US robotics firm Boston Dynamics — working with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) — has created BigDog, a four-legged robot that, at about a metre in height and length and weighing in at about 108kg, is roughly the size of a large mechanical bull.

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops

Next page: Animal inspiration

More from The Register

next story
Boffins attempt to prove the UNIVERSE IS JUST A HOLOGRAM
Is this the real life? Is this just fantasy?
Our LOHAN spaceplane ballocket Kickstarter climbs through £8000
Through 25 per cent but more is needed: Get your UNIQUE rewards!
China building SUPERSONIC SUBMARINE that travels in a BUBBLE
Shanghai to San Fran in two hours would be a trick, though
LOHAN tunes into ultra long range radio
And verily, Vultures shall speak status unto distant receivers
SpaceX prototype rocket EXPLODES over Texas. 'Tricky' biz, says Elon Musk
No injuries or near injuries. Flight stayed in designated area
Galileo, Galileo! Galileo, Galileo! Galileo fit to go. Magnifico
I'm just a poor boy, nobody loves me. But at least I can find my way with ESA GPS by 2017
EOS, Lockheed to track space junk from Oz
WA facility gets laser-eyes out of the fog
prev story

Whitepapers

Top 10 endpoint backup mistakes
Avoid the ten endpoint backup mistakes to ensure that your critical corporate data is protected and end user productivity is improved.
Implementing global e-invoicing with guaranteed legal certainty
Explaining the role local tax compliance plays in successful supply chain management and e-business and how leading global brands are addressing this.
Backing up distributed data
Eliminating the redundant use of bandwidth and storage capacity and application consolidation in the modern data center.
The essential guide to IT transformation
ServiceNow discusses three IT transformations that can help CIOs automate IT services to transform IT and the enterprise
Next gen security for virtualised datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.