Iron Harlequin, on 06 October 2012 - 03:33 PM, said:
As for the topic, after reading through it more than once, its not really going anywhere. The same points are being made and the same examples are being made. I'm pretty sure I clicked on the topic to see reasons why individuals call Battlemechs Robots instead of Battlemechs, not what other universes call their mechanized warmachines. While its interesting to know the tidbit about Czechoslovakia, and some of the other universes that have mechanized warmachines its really irrelevant to the question that the OP asked. He asked why people call them robots and not mechs, not "what are the names of all other universes anime, manga & games that use mechanized warmachines and what do they call them"
Now if someone says "Oh yea, I call them robots because thats something familiar to me" or "I call them mecha because of (insert name here) " that would be a response to the original question.
Another fun fact about the Czech etymology:
The modern usage of "robot" is specifically attributed to the 1920 play,
Rossum's Universal Robots (or R.U.R.) by Karel Čapek.
The play used the specific term Czech "
robota", which refers specifically to "forced labor" (as opposed to "employment" or "volunteer labor"; saying that it means simply "work" is incorrect).
Also, it should be noted that Čapek's
robota were actually organic (rather than mechanical) beings, grown on looms using a "formula" (which becomes a key plot point), making them more similar to the
Neosapiens from
ExoSquad or the "
Skinjobs" from the newer
Battlestar Galactica than to, say, C-3PO or ED-209 or Johnny 5.
As far as answering the question of using one term over another ("mecha" versus "robot" versus (universe/story-specific term)), it becomes a matter of proper classification and communication of specific meaning.
As an example, most definitions of "fighter aircraft" are along the lines of "an aircraft designed to seek out and destroy enemy aircraft in the air and to protect bomber aircraft" or "a high-speed military or naval airplane designed to destroy enemy aircraft in the air".
By contrast, the broader term "warplane", usually defined as "any aircraft designed for and used in warfare" or "a military airplane; specifically, one armed for combat".
As a specific example, the
Lockheed F-117 is a "warplane", but (in spite the "F" designation and "Stealth Fighter" moniker) it is not actually a "fighter aircraft" since it was not designed for use against other aircraft in flight (nor was it very fast or maneuverable).
Likewise, the
Fairchild Republic A-10 is also a "warplane" and, unlike the F-117, actually has some air-to-air capability (in the form of Sidewinder air-to-air missiles carried for self-defense), but one would be hard-pressed to find anyone who actually knows what an A-10 is that would refer to it as a "fighter aircraft" in the same sense as, say, an
F-15 or an
F-22.
Likewise, the term "robot",
when not used in the layman's sense, carries with it a specific set of connotations and meanings that set the particular thing(s) being designated "robot" apart from the broader set of generally-related things (for which we can use the term "mecha").
Specifically, the modern term "robot"
can be defined as "a reprogrammable, multifunctional manipulator designed to move material, parts, tools, or specialized devices through various programmed motions for the performance of a variety of tasks" (from the Robot Institute of America, 1979).
The
legal definition (ultimately derived from the definitions used by the
Robotic Industries Association and the robotics industry at large) is a bit more specific:
Quote
Today's robotics systems operate like most machines by way of hydraulic, pneumatic, and electrical power. Electric motors have become progressively smaller, with high power-to-weight ratios, enabling them to become the dominant means by which robots are powered. The crucial element in robotics is the artificial intelligence carried in the programmable circuitry of the machines.
Robots are comprised of elements that differ depending on end use. The hand of a robot, for instance, is referred to in the industry as an "end effector." End effectors may be specialized tools, such as spot welders or spray guns, or more general-purpose grippers. Common grippers include fingered and vacuum types. Another central element of robotics control technology is the sensor. It is through sensors that a robotic system receives knowledge of its environment, to which subsequent actions of the robot can be adjusted. Sensors are used to enable a robot to adjust to variations in the position of objects to be picked up, to inspect objects, and to monitor proper operation (although some robots are able to adjust to variations in object placement without the use of sensors, provided they have sufficient end effector flexibility). Important sensor types include visual, force and torque, speed and acceleration, tactile, and distance sensors. The majority of industrial robots use simple binary sensing, analogous to an on/off switch. This does not permit sophisticated feedback to the robot as to how successfully an operation was performed. Lack of adequate feedback also often requires the use of guides and fixtures to constrain the motions of a robot through an operation, which implies substantial inflexibility in changing operations.
As noted above (and previously in this very thread), a "proper/true" robot has three defining charcteristics/capabilities:
- a built-in, programmable driving machine intelligence
- one or more sensors through which the aforementioned machine intelligence can gather information about the environment in which it is operating
- one or more manipulators ("end effectors") through which the machine intelligence can instigate a change in one or more aspects or elements of the environment
BattleMechs and many other piloted, more-or-less humanoid mecha (HOUNDs, Gears, Mobile Suits, etc) are thus not technically "robots" as they generally lack the crucial "built-in driving machine intelligence"; they rely on (generally) human operators to continuously think for and direct the machine's actions in the stead of the (usually absent or incapable) integrated machine intelligence.
Your thoughts?
10
