Trending December 2023 # Darpa Virtual Robotics Challenge Finalists Move Forward With Life # Suggested January 2024 # Top 14 Popular

You are reading the article Darpa Virtual Robotics Challenge Finalists Move Forward With Life updated in December 2023 on the website Achiashop.com. We hope that the information we have shared is helpful to you. If you find the content interesting and meaningful, please share it with your friends and continue to follow and support us for the latest updates. Suggested January 2024 Darpa Virtual Robotics Challenge Finalists Move Forward With Life

DARPA Virtual Robotics Challenge finalists move forward with life-sized humanoid bot

As the next generation in computing springs forth, so too does the robots world – and with it, replacements for human beings in dangerous situations. What the DARPA Virtual Robotics Challenge this year is doing is filtering out challengers from across the globe – first from 100 entrants, then down to 26 entrants, then down to a select few or only one team that’ll gain the highest prize.

The goal of this program is to develop a robots capable of working with commands for complex- ground-based tasks for “dangerous, degraded, human-engineered environments.” The competitive nature of the program allows for an engaging setup for both those involved in creating these robots and this technology and for those that would otherwise not find interest in a program that, from its outward appearance, seems a bit more complicated than your average fun and engaging robot-based news release.

The images you’re seeing here are Example VRC images from the DARPA Simulator. Here you’re seeing one of what will be a wide variety of solutions for the future of robotics, specifically those aimed at replicating human abilities in situations where humans would otherwise be subject to dangerous surroundings. DARPA hopes to take the best of the best in today’s robotics-friendly scientists and put them to the task of finally, at long last, bringing a next-generation “Rosie” to a much more real place.

Below you’ll see Nate from OSRF (Open Source Robotics Foundation) speak about the preliminary challenge for this project.

While the contest itself was supposed to bring 6 teams to this round, greatness shone through, and 9 (and you’ll find soon, 7 in the end) appear here in this cut-down.

• Team IHMC, Institute for Human and Machine Cognition, Pensacola, Fla. (52 points)

• WPI Robotics Engineering C Squad (WRECS), Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Worcester, Mass. (39 points)

• MIT, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass. (34 points)

• Team TRACLabs, TRACLabs Inc., Webster, Texas (30 points)

• JPL / UCSB / Caltech, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif. (29 points)

• TORC, TORC / TU Darmstadt / Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Va. (27 points)

• Team K, Japan (25 points)

• TROOPER, Lockheed Martin, Cherry Hill, N.J. (24 points)

• Case Western University, Cleveland, Ohio (23 points)

Winners will receive a cash prize as well as – believe it or not – a real human-sized (life-sized, that is) humanoid robot to compete in the next round of the challenge. This machine is an Atlas robot, having been created by Boston Dynamics and based on the company’s Petman platform.

The finals for this DARPA Robotics Challenge (DRC) will be coming up in December of 2014. While the government brought on prize funding for a total of six teams, one of the current (9) teams JPL has announced that they’re giving some of their funding and their Atlas robot to the Lockheed Matin team – friendly of them, isn’t it? The rest of the funding will be going to a team newly formed to make a merger of Team K and Case Western: this team known as HKU.

HKU will be using a donated robot as well, this time from Hong Kong University, participating in the December finals as well. The final round will therefor be featuring seven teams.

You're reading Darpa Virtual Robotics Challenge Finalists Move Forward With Life

Start Your Humanoids: Today’s Darpa Robotics Challenge Is Historic, And Hilarious

The DARPA Robotics Challenge (DRC) Finals are simultaneously the most important event in the field of robotics in years, and one of the most childish things ever cooked up by the Pentagon. On the one hand, the two-day contest being held at the Fairplex in Pomona, California on June 5 and 6 is the culmination of a high-profile, three-year international competition, with twenty four teams of roboticists now competing for $3.5M in prize money.

Those millions are a fraction of the overall funding already provided to many of the teams by DARPA, the Pentagon’s research agency. The DRC’s goal is to foster the development of robotic first responders, systems that could rapidly deploy to disaster zones considered too dangerous for humans. “It’s important to have robots at the ready, that are fully hardened, that can be rapidly deployed in these cases,” says Tony Stentz, leader of Carnegie Mellon University’s DRC team, Tartan Rescue. “Unfortunately they aren’t very common, and the consequences can be high. When Fukushima happened, we realized that we didn’t have any decent robots that could go in there. If we had, they could have opened some valves, and released gas, and avoided some of the explosions that occurred.”

The human-centric nature of the eight known tasks that comprise the DRC has led to a thrilling design orthodoxy: nearly all of the robots are humanoids. Most walk on two legs, and manipulate their environment with human-like arms and hands. The few bots that aren’t bipeds, such as Carnegie Mellon’s CHIMP and NASA’s RoboSimian, either roll over obstacles, or scramble across them on all fours. And because DARPA has promised to squeeze communication signals to a trickle at some point during each robot’s time on the course, many teams have adopted a largely hands-off approach. A human might confirm which valve needs turning, but the robot will do the rest, determining how to approach, grab and rotate it. For systems that are not only walking on two legs, but navigating unfamiliar environments, this degree of autonomy is unheard of. Completing most of the DRC’s assigned tasks would be difficult enough during full teleoperation, with a team member constantly pulling the machine’s strings. Letting the bot control itself for long stretches is a profound leap of faith.

In addition to unprecedented robotic competence, the event promises to be a showcase for catastrophic incompetence. During the DRC Trials in 2013, the robots were equipped with “fall arresters,” tethers that prevented them from hitting the ground. The finals will feature no such fail-safes. In fact, falls are practically guaranteed. In order to win the DRC, teams must complete the most tasks in the shortest time. Bots are allowed two runs—one on Friday, and another on Saturday—but the emphasis on speed is bound to topple some systems. Will those unlucky robots survive their ordeal, and rise, triumphant, while the grandstands cheer them on? Or will they be hauled off the course, piece by expensive piece?

The DRC Finals are shaping up to be mix of cool robots doing cool things, and machines destroying themselves through slapstick. That’s the only hope for at least one or two systems achieving fleeting moments of human-level performance. If they can do that, they’ll be the kind of machines that have previously existed only in science fiction, and the first real glimmer of hope for a future populated by Rosie the Robot-style domestic servants. In fact, the competition isn’t even over, and it’s already made an impact on the field of robotics. In the run-up to the 2013 trials, Google essentially purchased whole sections of the DRC, when it acquired Boston Dynamics, the firm that DARPA had contracted to supply multiple teams with Atlas humanoids, and SCHAFT, the Japanese startup that wound up scoring the most points in the trials. But in a surprise move, Google decided to take SCHAFT out of the competition. Though no official reason was ever given, if Google hadn’t withdrawn, it might have been in the uncomfortable position of receiving more funding from the Pentagon, immediately after announcing that it wouldn’t be taking on any new military contacts. According to a current DRC team member, who did not want to be identified, this decision was good news for the remaining teams, joking that SCHAFT’s bot would have completed the DRC finals tasks “while holding a cigarette in one hand.”

Whatever its rationale for acquiring SCHAFT when it did, Google clearly changed the competition by pulling its frontrunner into the Googleplex. And if there’s any doubt that the DRC doubles as an open audition, consider that, when building its driverless car program, Google hired members from the top-scoring teams in DARPA’s last two robotics challenges. Those competitions—the Grand Challenge in 2005, and the Urban Challenge in 2007—are credited with kicking off the current race to build autonomous cars. With its broader focus on robots that can act as surrogates for humans, in environments built for humans, the DRC could attract investment in areas that are, at the moment, little more than discussion topics, such as machines that could function as live-in caretakers for seniors. And that’s just the most obvious example. The collective effort that’s gone into creating disaster bots can be applied to a wide range of other missions and classes of robots. In the coming days, our coverage from the finals will dissect the component parts of this landmark competition, and explore the major research areas and technical challenges that the DRC has both encouraged and paid roboticists to tackle.

If you want to watch this historic event for yourself, DARPA is livestreaming both days of the competition. Robots will be deployed in groups of four at a time, proceeding through identical versions of the course. It’s irrelevant who wins or loses those heats—all that matters is the robot’s task count and course time. Saturday should be more dramatic than Friday, as frontrunners emerge, and teams with slower times are tempted to take bigger risks. But consider yourself forewarned. As large as the DRC looms in the world of robotics, there’s a reason the finals aren’t being plastered across network TV. These robots are slow. The lack of safety tethers will add an element of suspense that was missing from the 2013 trials, and DRC program manager Gill Pratt has confirmed that there will be a ninth mystery task. Nonetheless, this is a research competition, not a sporting event, and the action will be intermittent, at best. So feel free to go about your weekend, doing what humans do in their spare time. We’ll be here in Pomona, keeping an eye on the robots.

Apple’s Retail Challenge: An Increasingly Complex Relationship With Public Spaces

“We will know we have done really great if it feels like a town square,” explained Apple’s SVP of Retail Angela Ahrendts in May 2023. Ahrendts was specifically referring to Apple’s flagship Union Square store in San Francisco, but the goal was part of a broader initiative to reimagine the experience of all Apple retail stores.

With more people shopping online than ever before, the success of the town square strategy is critical to Apple’s continued relevance in a changing space where other well established brands have struggled. Yet even for Apple, the road hasn’t been without bumps. The push to move closer to the hearts of communities is increasingly met with skepticism and even hostility from residents. Apple is faced with a significant and growing long-term challenge that it will need to tackle in order to fully realize its retail strategy.

If only it were that simple.

In each new city where Apple attempts to establish a significant contemporary store – typically adjacent to public space or inside a culturally notable building – a pattern of resistance is emerging. While every case is as unique and nuanced as the cities themselves, the broader sentiment is the same: citizens are wary of Apple’s reach.

“Some people may rejoice that they will have access to such a beautiful piece of architecture, but others will be clearly out of place,” writes Carlos Carmonamedina, a Washington D.C.-based artist, referring to Apple’s ambitious plan to restore the city’s historic Carnegie Library. Critics have argued that allowing a retail presence inside the library building, set to open later this year, undermines the original intent of the space as a public facility for learning. Apple’s answer is Today at Apple, a series of educational and community-driven sessions held at every store around the world. While the sessions are free and open to the public, signing up to attend still requires an Apple ID, and with the exception of live performances, getting the most out of a session often requires having your own devices.

Apple’s plans for Melbourne’s Federation Square (Photo: Foster + Partners)

Louder but sometimes less articulate are concerns raised over Apple’s proposed flagship store in Melbourne’s Federation Square. The project would be one of the company’s largest retail investments to date, placing a store not adjacent to public land, but on it. Construction would also come at the expense of the Yarra building, home of the Koorie Heritage Trust and numerous historic artifacts, all of which would be relocated. Apple says the proposal will improve the visibility and accessibility of the nearby Yarra River. The concerns of Melbourne citizens are justified, but difficult to parse amidst a wash of impassioned arguments that often devolve into attacks on Apple’s products and practices rather than the project itself.

In Sweden, a similar situation is unfolding. Apple and architecture firm Foster + Partners have revised renders depicting a retail presence at the head of Kungsträdgården, a historic park in Stockholm. Initial plans for the store were deemed too large and disruptive for the square. Even after redesigning the building with a more subdued footprint, nearly 80% of over 7,500 people surveyed in a recent Swedish poll viewed the store unfavorably.

Apple’s plans for Stockholm’s Kungsträdgården. (Photo: Foster + Partners)

“Personally, I think it would be a huge step up aesthetically from the (TGI) Friday’s restaurant that currently occupies the space, but I do think there could be even better use of the location than an Apple Store,” Stockholm-based software developer Andreas Hassellöf told me. In early July, public consultation began on the project, with hopes to facilitate similar civil discourse about the best use of the space.

Even Apple’s newly completed amphitheater in Milan, Italy has not gone without criticism. An unfavorable review in one Milanese newspaper called the store “an invasion.” Built underneath the historic Piazza Liberty, the space was formerly home to the Apollo Cinema.

In cities where town square-format Apple locations have already been established, communities have embraced the stores warmly, dissolving initial skepticism. Apple Michigan Avenue has quickly become an architectural destination and photography landmark in downtown Chicago. Apple Williamsburg in Brooklyn routinely draws crowds to star-studded live performances. So why are new projects so polarizing?

Apple’s earliest stores received little criticism, since most conformed to standard storefronts inside existing shopping malls throughout the United States. Even later and more ambitious projects were generally well received, with only a few exceptions like “there goes the neighborhood” concerns over New York’s Upper East Side store. Apple’s retail projects have long been lauded for their careful restoration and painstaking attention to detail.

Even the idea of Apple retail functioning as a gathering place isn’t entirely a new concept. Stores like Puerta del Sol in Madrid and Passeig de Gràcia in Barcelona bordered public areas long before the rollout of Today at Apple. Widespread skepticism didn’t begin until Apple started explicitly promoting their stores as modern community hubs. A new wave of negative press coverage lamenting the privatization of public space followed when Angela Ahrendts used the words “town square” during an Apple keynote. Customers hear a message that Apple is trying to replace, not complement their cherished public spaces.

Misaligned expectations may also contribute to skepticism. Anyone who has been to a contemporary Apple store with the latest design elements, video wall, and Forum will immediately recognize how dramatically different the spaces feel compared to “classic” locations. But in Australia, only one store has been refreshed with the new design. In Sweden, none. Globally, only around one fifth of all locations can offer the full Today at Apple experience. Without visiting a new store or taking a Today at Apple session, it’s difficult for concerned citizens to form an accurate picture of how Apple will impact their community.

“Gadget store can’t be the best possible use—not in the District,” writes Kriston Capps for CityLab in an argument against an Apple store in Mount Vernon Square. The perception of Apple stores as simply electronics outlets – no different than a shiny Best Buy – is not uncommon, and it speaks to a need for more thorough communication from Apple to the communities they prepare to enter.

While Apple can’t send every Stockholm citizen to Milan to see what’s in store for Kungsträdgården (although a few local journalists were offered a preview), they can take a proactive role in the community before construction even begins. Hosting Today at Apple-esque events and sessions in local venues – even without an accompanying store – would reap goodwill and offer residents a preview of what they can look forward to. Projects like the former Apple Music Festival come to mind. “…After seeing what they have done here in Milan, I’m not particularly worried that it will be bad in Stockholm,” writes Feber.

History has shown that commercial activities and public space can live hand in hand when executed in way that provides a perceived value to every party involved. Broader acceptance of modern-day town squares will continue to be a significant challenge for Apple as their retail ambitions trend toward increasingly grand architecture projects. The success of a store can’t be measured only by completion and profitability, it must also be valued as a resource by those who live and work around it. An upfront effort to set the stage and educate people about a significant store wouldn’t be a frivolous expense, rather it demonstrates a long-term investment in a community that’s about to do the same.

Going Ahead With Aerial Robotics: A Window To Flying Robotic World

Beholding the industry trends, we can say that a substantial interest in aerial robotics has grown in recent years. Flying surely opens up new opportunities to robotics services to serve several tasks including search and rescue, observation, mapping and navigation along with inspection and maintenance. The technology of Aerial Robotics enhances the human-robotics collaborations for better. Let’s decode the meaning of Aerial Robotics, an emerging technology in market today. What is Aerial Robotics? The pace at which robotics industry is expanding is giving rise to new disruptive technologies which are transforming the existing operations in the industry. When the aerial technologies are blended with the virtue of robotics, Aerial Robotics enters the picture. The technology, in basic, is built to simplify the drone operations automating the digitization of sites and locations through high-frequency data collection, processing, visualization, and analysis. Historical Background Without a doubt, the basic structure of aerial robots, unmanned aerial vehicle, have foundations built in aircraft and automatic flight control system. Notably, the first UAV ever made was based on the modified structure of manned rockets and aircraft architecture. The evolution of such technology has always challenged the disruption leading to miniaturization, the agility of flight control, perceptual skills, navigational autonomy and flight endurance along with aerial manipulation. Current Trends The concept of system miniaturization, agile flight control, perception, and 3D mapping, autonomous motion planning, Multi-Robot Systems, Augmented Human-Robot and Prolonged Endurance, merged with the unmanned aerial vehicle, is disrupting the prevailing aircraft market for sure. The current trends of aerial robotics booming the industry are: • Retaining Stability during Propeller Failure • Convertible Unmanned Aerial Vehicle • Aerial Mapping • Information Gain-based Efficient Exploration and 3D mapping of Unknown Environments • Localizability-aware Autonomous Exploration and Mapping • Multi-Modal Localization and Mapping • GPS-denied navigation The research and development of unmanned aerial vehicle have accelerated at a fast pace in the past decade. The annual Aerospace Forecast Report released by the US Federal Aviation Administration predicts that in the commercial sector, more than 7 million UAVs will be purchased by the year 2023. It has also been estimated that the unmanned aerial vehicle market will worth approximately $15 billion by 2023. Impact on Society With new technology comes a heap of responsibilities not only towards business and development but also considering its social impact. Every technology that ever existed has influenced society in certain ways mostly proving itself as a boon to mankind. The similar convention goes with aerial robotics too. The technology surely has some indicative applications for the betterment and welfare of people. Aerial robotics contributes to infrastructure inspection and maintenance of different architectures. The technology also provides with humanitarian assistance. Precision agriculture, based on observing, measuring and responding to inter and intra-field variability in crops as a part of farming management, is also a major beneficiary of this technology. Along with that, aerial robotics is also helpful in the climate control process. Above all, the most significant deployment of aerial robotics in the welfare of humankind is security and surveillance. In fact, police and defense forces use drone and other aerial equipment to ensure the security and safety of citizen. Challenges The technology of aerial robotics is definitely a great approach to change the world and bring about significant transformation in society. Regardless of what it has achieved today, every technology and its application has to go through different challenging phases which tests their boundaries and odes that not even the sky is the limit for them. Aerial robotics technology also possesses some vital challenges which need to overcome with time and innovation. The debates and discussion are already tearing the eardrums if this robotics technology is reliable for sensible decision making in the world of intelligent automation or not. Certain other concerns are also creating a buzz around the corner. • If any particular skill set is required for operating aerial robots? • Is there any future for aerial robotics technology beyond flying camera? • If the technology worth assigning complex tasks for execution or not? • What are the collision avoidance features of aerial robotics? • In controlled national airspace, will it be trustworthy to fly aerial robot in urban areas? The industry is already dealing with the talent gap and security breaches in various tech-adoption. Amidst this, the application of aerial robotics adds to the concerns of experts and professionals regarding its potential uses and misuses. This simply implies that future aerial robots have to deal intelligently with uncertainties in their path. Futuristic Roadmap

Beholding the industry trends, we can say that a substantial interest in aerial robotics has grown in recent years. Flying surely opens up new opportunities to robotics services to serve several tasks including search and rescue, observation, mapping and navigation along with inspection and maintenance. The technology of Aerial Robotics enhances the human-robotics collaborations for better. Let’s decode the meaning of Aerial Robotics, an emerging technology in market chúng tôi pace at which robotics industry is expanding is giving rise to new disruptive technologies which are transforming the existing operations in the industry. When the aerial technologies are blended with the virtue of robotics, Aerial Robotics enters the picture. The technology, in basic, is built to simplify the drone operations automating the digitization of sites and locations through high-frequency data collection, processing, visualization, and analysis.Without a doubt, the basic structure of aerial robots, unmanned aerial vehicle, have foundations built in aircraft and automatic flight control system. Notably, the first UAV ever made was based on the modified structure of manned rockets and aircraft architecture. The evolution of such technology has always challenged the disruption leading to miniaturization, the agility of flight control, perceptual skills, navigational autonomy and flight endurance along with aerial chúng tôi concept of system miniaturization, agile flight control, perception, and 3D mapping, autonomous motion planning, Multi-Robot Systems, Augmented Human-Robot and Prolonged Endurance, merged with the unmanned aerial vehicle, is disrupting the prevailing aircraft market for sure. The current trends of aerial robotics booming the industry are: • Retaining Stability during Propeller Failure • Convertible Unmanned Aerial Vehicle • Aerial Mapping • Information Gain-based Efficient Exploration and 3D mapping of Unknown Environments • Localizability-aware Autonomous Exploration and Mapping • Multi-Modal Localization and Mapping • GPS-denied navigation The research and development of unmanned aerial vehicle have accelerated at a fast pace in the past decade. The annual Aerospace Forecast Report released by the US Federal Aviation Administration predicts that in the commercial sector, more than 7 million UAVs will be purchased by the year 2023. It has also been estimated that the unmanned aerial vehicle market will worth approximately $15 billion by chúng tôi new technology comes a heap of responsibilities not only towards business and development but also considering its social impact. Every technology that ever existed has influenced society in certain ways mostly proving itself as a boon to mankind. The similar convention goes with aerial robotics too. The technology surely has some indicative applications for the betterment and welfare of people. Aerial robotics contributes to infrastructure inspection and maintenance of different architectures. The technology also provides with humanitarian assistance. Precision agriculture, based on observing, measuring and responding to inter and intra-field variability in crops as a part of farming management, is also a major beneficiary of this technology. Along with that, aerial robotics is also helpful in the climate control process. Above all, the most significant deployment of aerial robotics in the welfare of humankind is security and surveillance. In fact, police and defense forces use drone and other aerial equipment to ensure the security and safety of chúng tôi technology of aerial robotics is definitely a great approach to change the world and bring about significant transformation in society. Regardless of what it has achieved today, every technology and its application has to go through different challenging phases which tests their boundaries and odes that not even the sky is the limit for them. Aerial robotics technology also possesses some vital challenges which need to overcome with time and innovation. The debates and discussion are already tearing the eardrums if this robotics technology is reliable for sensible decision making in the world of intelligent automation or not. Certain other concerns are also creating a buzz around the corner. • If any particular skill set is required for operating aerial robots? • Is there any future for aerial robotics technology beyond flying camera? • If the technology worth assigning complex tasks for execution or not? • What are the collision avoidance features of aerial robotics? • In controlled national airspace, will it be trustworthy to fly aerial robot in urban areas? The industry is already dealing with the talent gap and security breaches in various tech-adoption. Amidst this, the application of aerial robotics adds to the concerns of experts and professionals regarding its potential uses and misuses. This simply implies that future aerial robots have to deal intelligently with uncertainties in their path.Well, it is rightly said that the future belongs to flying robots. With such a great innovation, it is absolutely possible to create a future on wings. This significant technology improvement has paved the way for even more dramatic changes, transformations and innovation in the coming years.

Make Your Small Business Look Bigger With Virtual Services

While it’s always nice to have extra help–in the form of a personal assistant, an accountant, or a lawyer, say–it’s also nice to cut costs. Small and medium businesses often can’t afford to hire salaried professionals for all of those extra tasks that must be done.

If you already operate on a shoestring or need to cut costs–and perhaps water cooler chatter–read on for virtual services you can “hire,” instead of an extra employee.

Replace Your Personal Assistant or Secretary

Hiring a dedicated personal assistant or a secretary will cost you around $35,000/year ($2900/month), plus benefits. But you can easily outsource much of the work of a personal assistant to the virtual world for just a fraction of the cost of hiring a professional, especially if you know what tasks you need the most help with.

If you do a lot of traveling and entertaining, RedButler offers personal assistant and concierge services (such as making hotel reservations), and it features a special membership card that allows holders to receive discounts at hotels and restaurants. RedButler memberships start at just $36.95/month for 15 tasks (each phone call or hotel booking constitutes one task) and a membership card.

If you’re looking for more of a dedicated personal assistant, Habilis and AskSunday offer hourly membership plans. Instead of being billed per task, you can sign up for a certain number of hours per month. Habilis plans start at $350 for 40 hours, while AskSunday plans start at $150 for 10 hours. Both offer personal assistant services such as making phone calls, handling e-mails, and making reservations, and they feature 24-hour availability.

Replace Your Lawyer

While I don’t recommend completely outsourcing your legal needs to technology, free legal Websites are a valuable resource. Because lawyers charge by the hour, doing your own research, or at least finding the correct legal form, can actually save you a small chunk of change.

Replace Your Accountant

If you’d prefer not to be tied to your desktop, online accounting services are another option. QuickBooks features an online version whose cost ranges from $12.95/month to $63.16/month and has a lot of the features of the desktop version, including invoice and expense tracking, payroll support, and online banking support.

FreshBooks, whose plans range from free to $40/month, is more suited for small businesses larger than one person. FreshBooks allows you to track invoices and expenses, and to create and manage inventory, and it even creates and mails invoices for you via snail mail at a nominal additional cost.

Even if you end up hiring an accountant anyway–just as an extra pair of eyes before tax time–these services are worth it. After all, if you have your finances in relative order, it will save your accountant time–which translates to saving you money.

Replace Your Customer Support

Customer support is an essential–yet tiring and time-consuming–aspect of running a small business. Fortunately, a few online tools can make customer support a relatively easy, painless process.

Zendesk is a virtual help desk and more of an organizational tool for customer support. Instead of crowdsourcing customer support as Get Satisfaction does, Zendesk allows you to solve customer problems using helpdesk trouble tickets. You can embed Zendesk into your company’s Website, enabling customers to open a ticket when they have a problem. Zendesk helps you manage, organize, and resolve open tickets.

Zendesk is nicely transparent in that customers can see who is working on their ticket and when it’s expected to be resolved. Zendesk can also help users help themselves with its ticket tagging–certain tags will pull up forum and discussion suggestions that may resolve the customer’s issue. Zendesk starts at $9/month for up to three customer service agents.

Next page: Book flights, fix your PCs, and build Websites

Why Darpa Wants An Experimental Spaceplane

So DARPA wants a reusable spaceplane. I mean, who doesn’t? For decades, space experts have tried to design quick-turnover, reusable launch systems. So far, however, no one has made one that works. “There really isn’t any kind of vehicle today that does exactly what they’re asking people to do,” Micah Walter-Range, director of research and analysis at the Space Foundation, tells Popular Science. “You can certainly compare it to existing vehicles, but it seems to be a new class.”

Here’s how the dream goes: Our fictional rocket would blast off at hypersonic speeds. Once it reached the right altitude, it would release any upper stages (and payload) it might have. Then it would turn back toward the Earth and land gently someplace where engineers would be able to fetch it, polish it up, and stick it back on the launch pad. Theoretically, reusable rockets should cut the costs of launches enough to open up space to more groups, such as students and startups, and ease NASA’s financial burdens.

It’d be like having a jumbo jet for getting to space. Just load, unload, and repeat.

“There really isn’t any kind of vehicle today that does exactly what they’re asking people to do.”

For one thing, humans have never made launch vehicles with reusable rockets. Reusable passenger spaceships, like the vehicles Virgin Galactic is developing, are supposed to reach suborbital altitudes, not low-Earth orbit. NASA’s Space Shuttles were reusable, but required days of refurbishing in between flights. Even among the one-time-use satellite launchers available today, none have quite the carrying capacity or price of Experimental Spaceplane 1. For example, Orbital Sciences’ Pegasus XL carries just 1,000 pounds and costs an estimated $30 million to $40 million for a low-Earth-orbit flight. SpaceX’s (current, non-reusable) Falcon 9 carries about 20,000 pounds, at a cost of $54 million per flight.

Cheaper launches would mean more people could send more stuff to space. DARPA hopes the XS-1, once launched, will serve the students and startups that build small, affordable cubesats, says Alan Wilhite, an aerospace engineering professor at Georgia Tech who previously worked on reusable shuttles at NASA.

“This is a DARPA-hard kind of problem.”

In addition, a vehicle that could launch quickly could be helpful for military objectives. “Let’s say you’re planning a raid to find the next Osama bin Laden, something like that, and due to the timing of it, you don’t have a satellite in the right place,” Walter-Range says. “You have a small satellite on the ground and you just need to get it up tomorrow.”

So why has nobody been able to make an XS-1 before? Different experts cited different reasons. Wilhite, who headed the Vehicle Analysis Branch at NASA Langley in the 1980s, points to technologies, such as hypersonic vehicles, that didn’t previously exist. Getting an aircraft that’s just rocketed up to the edge of space to come back down again—Gently! No crashes that would render the rocket unusable—is another tough problem.

Mitchell Walker, also an aerospace engineer at Georgia Tech, thinks XS-1’s toughest hurdles would happen between its back-to-back flights. Once its reusable first stage reaches the ground, engineers would have make sure it’s good to go again within 24 hours. “Anybody can get the engine back,” Walker says. “The question is, can you convince yourself that it’s okay to put your next multi-million-dollar asset on top of it?”

Extensive between-flights safety testing and refurbishing is why the Space Shuttle wouldn’t fulfill DARPA’s 10-flights-in-10-days requirement. Testing also added significantly to the Space Shuttle’s costs.

Of course, the Space Shuttles carried astronauts, a load more precious than any multi-million-dollar NASA project. XS-1 would not only carry unmanned satellites, its 5,000-pound limit means those satellites would be small and likely not too expensive. No James Webb Space Telescopes here. So XS-1’s customers might be satisfied with fewer, shorter safety checks, if that meant cheaper, more frequent flights.

Engineering-wise, there are a lot of variables to balance in the XS-1. “It’s a really neat problem because it’s got a lot of dynamics. Where are you hauling? What are you hauling?” Walker says. “This is a DARPA-hard kind of problem.”

Update the detailed information about Darpa Virtual Robotics Challenge Finalists Move Forward With Life on the Achiashop.com website. We hope the article's content will meet your needs, and we will regularly update the information to provide you with the fastest and most accurate information. Have a great day!