Should intelligence be hidden?

E-mail

Are embedded systems becoming too embedded? That's a feeling I get from two contrasting shows in San Jose last month. The Embedded Systems Conference (ESC) presented one view, showing how sophisticated today's designers have become at hiding intelligence within products such as the Gibson self-tuning guitar and the Sony Rolly dancing MP3 player.

But perhaps they have gone too far. Perhaps people would rather have their intelligent products look intelligent—that is, take on a humanoid form. That's the message I took away from an exhibit titled “Robots: Evolution of a Cultural Icon” at the San Jose Museum of Art (SJMOA). While the ESC showed robotic technology as it is, the SJMOA exhibit presents an almost plaintive look at what might have been: “We were promised robots” is the lament of the artist Michael A. Salter in a statement that serves as a subtitle to the exhibit (which will run through October 19).

So what, exactly, was promised that wasn't delivered? According to an exhibit handout, many people “…grew up imagining a future populated by friendly humanoid robots that would help us with our homework, mow our lawns, [and] even cook our meals.”

The crux of that statement is that people were looking for friendship from their robots as much as utility. After all, computers can help with homework, intelligent microwave ovens can cook our meals, and a product called RoboMower can mow our lawns. The problem, it seems, is just that none of those devices is particularly friendly.

As for what is on display at the museum, some artists seemed to perceive people's need for artificial companions. Alan Rath's “I Like to Watch” uses its ghostly, moving CRT eyes to try to establish rapport with the viewer. Jason Van Anden's robot pair Neil and Iona engages the viewer with body language, facial expressions, and weird sounds. Both these exhibits were strangely compelling. Perhaps engineers looking for a killer app should simply build everybody an electromechanical, humanoid best friend.

As for the traditional hardware and software engineers who have designed today's embedded systems—they may have no brighter future than the humanoid artificial beings imagined by visionaries from Mary Shelley to Isaac Asimov have had thus far. At an ESC panel titled “Addressing Embedded Challenges with ARM Technology,” participants suggested that emerging design tools would enable domain experts—people skilled in medical applications, for example—to develop embedded systems without needing to rely on experts skilled in C++ programming and multicore embedded architectures.

Do such new design tools make traditional engineers obsolete? I put that question to Mike Santori, business and technology fellow at National Instruments. He said that indeed some domain experts will be able to use off-the-shelf tools to design medical and other relatively low-volume applications, but he said that specialized embedded-system designers will continue to have a role to play in optimizing iPhones and other high-volume designs.

I'll elaborate on Santori's views on classical engineering's potential obsolescence in my blog “Taking the measure” and in “Innovators,” a special supplement to be included with the June 26 issue of sibling publication EDN.