• FaceDeer@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 hours ago

    Right before the AI boom really started to take off there was a robot “companion” named Moxie that I thought struck exactly the right balance - it was nowhere near the uncanny valley, staying firmly on the cute robot side, and it used a projected cartoon face that was simple but expressive. Unfortunately the company’s timing was rather poor, they went out of business right before the AI back end would have been able to make full use of an avatar like this. I’d love to see another version of this approach.

    • T156@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      14 hours ago

      I don’t know, Moxie feels like a DreamWorks character popped inside of a plastic casing. Especially with that image, it comes across like a render or a movie character than a real thing.

      Personally, I’m more partial to robots that don’t have a human-like face at all. Like Jibo, whose “face” was a simple flat circle on a screen. Cosmo might be the upper end, where it has two “eyes” (squares) on a screen, but no other features.

      IMO there’s a bit of a mistake in trying to have human faces on robots. Not only do you then have to contend with the uncanny valley, but you don’t really need those to convey the same thing. Pose and things like that work equally as well.

      We don’t have people walking around trying to put human faces on cats and dogs, but we can understand them well enough all the same.

      • FaceDeer@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Yup. IIRC they paid the movie’s producers for the product placement, and then the company went under before the movie’s release date. So it ended up advertising a defunct product. But at least it fit perfectly into the movie’s plot.