What is Digg?81 Comments
- jstohler, on 10/12/2007, -3/+35Will Mexican robots eventually do it cheaper?
- Harrison88, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16Time to build house: 24 hours
Time to move machine to build location: 6 weeks, 3 HGVs, 2 cranes. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18No, but now the Mexicans will complain the robots are taken der jobs.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+145. Illegals get their asses shot by plasma cannons under the new immigration and civil rights for robots act.
- Hermitwise, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13Well if we eventually get to a point where all the non creative mindless repetitive task jobs are done with robots then the economy will shift, kinda like Star Trek. Are you suggesting that we shy away from new inventions because the society will have to adapt with the changes?
- LLLSecretChimp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11They'll only take the work that American robots just won't do.
- AlphaPrime, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9Wow, a house in 24 hours. Makes Extreme Makeover: Home Edition's week-long build seem like forever.
- geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9That's okay, because the one building company that does adopt the robot can fire half its workforce and build 3-4x the number of homes in the same amount of time, and brag about their homes superior insulating properties. The other builders who don't get with the future will all be left behind by these things.
Besides that, imagine what it could do for the third world. - geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8That's why you'd localize it's usage and build neighborhoods with it. Imagine how quickly you could recover from a disaster like Katrina or a tornado like in the mid-west; just set up a home printer, print out 100 homes, neighborhood saved. May take a week to get to the next neighborhood, but it's still a lot faster than waiting for an entire construction crew (which could be operating in parallel, or behind the printer to finish the homes for living).
- Jolls, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7don't forget the jobs it will create! This is like complaining about how computers were going to obselete so many jobs... well, we found out about how 'doomsday' that was. yeesh
- aerospace, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Thomas Edison was building concrete homes a long time ago. It only took a few days.
http://flyingmoose.org/truthfic/edison.htm
No one wanted concrete homes then, either. - strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6That does include demolition, cleanup, all inside work, plumbing, electricity, phone, cable, etc and all furniture and appliances.
- podgey22, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7Why didn't somebody take the extra two seconds to post the original link rather than this ***** blogspam. Even if it has a lot of readers, the article on engadget just slims down what slashdot wrote... And they cut down what The Times wrote...
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-2546574,00.html - MuffinMan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Dey took er hyobs!
- Vlatro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Building robots pays more than building pre-fab low budget housing. If construction workers feel threatened, they should expand their skill set to include machine maintenance. Of course a machine this large would have to be disassembled and reassembled on site for transportation down smaller city roads. There's a job in that. Loading and transport of materials also. It doesn't seem to dig foundations either. Wiring and plumbing, flooring, siding, painting, lighting fixtures, windows installation... There's still people involved in the process. The machine's impact seems to be greatest on framing. I've seen 3 story homes framed in about 6 hours by a skilled crew. Consider this to be more of an exploration of technological possibilities in the construction field, not a replacement of skilled workers. Even if this ends up being the holy grail of construction and is widely adopted, that's great news for the consumer. First time home buyers will have a a cheaper option than is currently available. Existing home owners should see an increase in their home's value, being the alternative to living in a mass produced concrete cave.
- Ascus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Next up, pirated house plans.
- smtelegadis, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6This device would rely on too many perfect conditions in order to be practical.
1) Soil Conditions
2) Perfect Plans (Down to the last light switch. Haven't seen a set yet)
3) Local Inspection Cooperation
4) Local Structural Design Requirements (Earthquake, Hurricane, Snow loading, etc)
5) Uniform Quality Material & Supply rate. (Image a Cement Pump Running 24 straight. I'm sure the neighbors wouldn't mind.)
to name a few.
Five years more like fifty. Construction technology takes years to develop and even more to be accepted. Drywall wasn't accepted into the major main stream of construction until the late 60's to early 70's, and it was developed in the 33-34. That was easy to implement, improved quality, cut cost, and reduced time significantly.
"3D Inkjet printer" Imagine that paper jam! - Hypersapien, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Construction worker unions are NOT going to be happy.
- spiralspirit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4drywall pretty much is gypsum. The robot uses concrete for structure and "sprayable drywall" for interior surfaces. I'm still kind of interested in how it does insulation, since neither concrete or gypsum are good for that.
- homeskillet77, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4This thing can't completely build a home without human intervention. Come on people, reality is knocking. Sure it will do allot of the macro construction stuff. But the fit and finish stuff will have to be done by humans ( for now at least ) I'm not saying that some day this won't be totally automated...but the article makes it sound a little too "pie in the sky" for my liking. They make an argument something to the effect of if cars and clothes are produced automatically..blah blah. But the thing here is that humans are involved in almost every step. I'll admit that this is cool, but not as automatic or fully hands off as they are pitching it. I say it's a step in the right direction though ;)
- ChillHomie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Best part of the article
[Via Slashdot] - columbusgeek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4The best part of the article is Brents comment
Brent @ Jan 15th 2007 3:55PM
"I hear the robot is free after rebates, but the concrete and gypsum cartridges are really expensive." - hode, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Here's a novel idea: mass produce the house in sections in a factory. Then deliver the sections to the location instead of piles of raw materials.
- mjwedeking, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4$1.5 million, that is it. What is that, less than 3 cookie cutter homes in California.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4who cares if it can build a house, as long as I can live in its closet I'm happy
- webtekie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4at $1.5 million? C'mon they can get 1.5 million Mexicans for like $500
- diggsIt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Si.
- Vlatro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Sorry to be the voice of disillusionment. Unions love this *****. If framing a house is skilled labor then certainly operating this machine is. With fewer people able to preform the task, the value of workers who can goes up significantly. The value of the worker is what empowers unions. They do not give a damn about your rights as an employee, your financial situation, or any of that candy-coated horse ***** they ram down people throats. They are people organizing to make more money than they would otherwise be able to. They go to incredible lengths to keep their profits as high as possible while controlling as much of the market as possible. Faster, cheaper construction = more profit. Increasing the necessary skill set of the worker justifies increased prices, while the relative savings of automation ensure greater market share and lower production costs.
While this may manage to piss off nearly every member of a union, the union ultimately benefits from it. Those administrating the union know that, and they see skilled workers come and go all the time. They're in for the long haul, and will protect their own interests over that of the worker anytime. - Blisshead, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I don't want to live in a concrete and gypsum shell. I like wood, brick and drywall preferably with furnishings. Screw you robot!
OTOH, I can see uses for this commercially, low cost etc. I think the value could show up with volume. - Hermitwise, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@kloud213, I wasn't saying that building a house is easy, what I was saying is that the actual physical labor of building a house breaks down into a series of skills that you can program into a robot, therefor they are mindless repetitive tasks, overseeing, designing and planning are completely different. I love how you blindly insult me upon getting defensive about your job that I wasn't even insulting. Is there something wrong with working smarter, not harder?
- vuedoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Does it get to the job site in a pickup with a dog in the back?
- webtekie, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Here is the scenario:
1.Robots are employed to take over labor intensive work
2.Illegals that do this job are laid off
3.Illegals need to eat
4.Illegals destroy robots for revenge - rotten777, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Think about this, if a house is 1/5th the cost and can be built in a day, what will happen to home owners insurance? ;)
- kloud213, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I'm sorry but i build houses and remodel homes for a living. This is ridiculous, concrete is to cold for a warm family home. I don't mean temperature cold either. this will never fly for the upper-scale residents who are the ones commissioning houses. This would be great for Katrina incidents though. I know they said the one in england will be able to build holes for things like plumbing and electrical but that would just be a pain in the ass. This idea at its current state is retarded.
- gomezfreak, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@Hermitwise
I wouldn't exactly call home construction a "mindless repetitive task" it takes time and skill to become good at a "skilled trade" as it is called. Building homes is not akin to flipping burgers at Mickey D's. That's why there are apprenticeship programs to learn to become an electrician, carpenter, welder, etc.
You obviously haven't worked in one of the jobs mentioned above, or you'd have a little more respect for it than calling them "mindless jobs." I'm not religious but hell, even Jesus was a carpenter, I just don't see skilled trades going away anytime soon. Maybe they should spend some of that R and D money on putting kids back in shop classes so they can at least read a tape measure and hang up their own drapes, or I guess in the future we'll have a robot do that too. - spiralspirit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3no reason for all the houses to look the same at all. Contractors currently build similar houses because its cheaper, easier to get labor for, and materials are easy to acquire.
With this, since it will be working from some kind of digital design, there is no reason at all for the houses to look the same. The fabricator doesn't care what shape it constructs, since it does all of them (hopefully) equally well, unlike living breathing people. - mediaprone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I understand that people from the Midwest are not accustomed to concrete homes, but in Florida, Arizona, California and so on, they are the norm now. We prefer the concrete structure because of hurricanes and other bad weather conditions that would destroy a wooden structure. In Florida your home value can suffer because it is an older wood structure. There are many benefits to concrete structures, not just the structural integrity, but they are better for the environment than wood, and they will last longer, and won’t suffer the same rot that standard homes do today.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3that's so wrong, but i still laughed
- spiralspirit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2reading that article, most of the problems come from the "hype" of the houses being the salvation of slum-dwellers, and from the expense and trouble of getting nickel plated forms. The only credible point is the difficulty in repairing something withing the walls.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Anybody who has ever worked in construction knows a robot cannot build a house. It might be able to put up pre-fab walls or roof or somthing like that.
- xeomage, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's really more like a plotter than an inkjet. This was first brought up in 2004.
There's 3d animations of it at http://www.isi.edu/craft/CC/Welcome_files/resources/animation.html
Their website: http://www.contourcrafting.org - Feanor, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7First robots take over the assembly line, now construction? Jobs will suffer greatly.
- Barnstormer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I thought about this possibility several years ago. But I just assumed that whoever first tried to do this on a large scale would go missing after a short while. There are certain, well, lets call them labor organizations that don't take too kindly to this sort of thing.
- wiremonkeymommy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2this will work, extra points for using recycled materials
- geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Only if by pickup you mean barge.
- diggsIt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Si ++.
- nyxerebos, on 05/17/2009, -0/+1It doesn't need to, construction isn't all about houses. If it can do a single job in a reverse production line, or in a project such as a dam or bridge, it has the potential to save money.
- yournamehere, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2iRobot here we come
- NYC10004, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This thing doesn't create and an entire house down to the bathroom tiles. It simply puts the large structures in place: foundation, walls, levels, etc. After that's done, the electricians, plumbers, carpenters and what not, come to finish the job. Because humans aren't completely excluded after the in ital process the construction will return to normal snails pace. In order for the process to be completely automated, they'll have to create small robots to go in after the large one is done.
- nyxerebos, on 05/17/2009, -0/+1see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papercrete
-
Show 51 - 79 of 79 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is