Talk:Utility fog

How would it work

How would you get the nanobots to change shape/react when it happens, for the seatbelt example, what would trigger them and get them to change shape? The snare 10:13, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Electrical impulses, they act like a brain, basically, each one forming a neuron. To be frank, this tech seems to be approaching some of the more exceedingly dangerous aspects of nanotech. I would advocate extremely tight control over it. Jachra (talk) 04:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Why? This isn't talking about self-replicating machines, so I just don't see the danger. Dysfunction (talk) 04:09, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Claytronics

This project at CMU seems to have similar goals...

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~claytronics/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.152.214.236 (talk) 00:12, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

This website was added to Utility fog/External links--Gjeremy (talk) 01:48, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Utility fog Tentacles

Foglets could have tentacles insted of rigid arms.--Gjeremy (talk) 14:54, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

A note by Chris Henson

A note by Chris Henson: Potential algorithms for Foglet communication exist today as routing protocols which are currently used in routing and switching infrastructure which supports the public Internet, (as well as private networks). Routing Protocols such as BGP, EIGRP and OSPF all contain mechanisms for neighbor discovery and neighbor maintenance, mechanisms for sending and receiving information about directly connected nodes, node states, etc., thus allowing each individual node to create its own picture of the entire network. Furthermore, at any time, most routing protocols can quickly adapt to disruption in the network converging on a decision to use a new path for communication. The tens of thousands of Routers which participate in the world's Internet backbone can be thought of as a potential great-grandfather for Utility Fog. Each Internet router has its own individual route table, each single route table containing millions of routes as well as each Router having multiple interfaces which connect physically to other Internet backbone routers. Each internet router has the ability to select best path, overcome and adapt to outages within the Internet. From a communication standpoint, Utility Fog is a microscopic model of the entire Internet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.176.183.104 (talk • contribs)

Robotics attention needed

• Expand
• Update

Chaosdruid (talk) 10:56, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Dukaj

Jacek Dukaj's "Perfect imperfection" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfekcyjna_niedoskonałość ) novel make big use of Utility fog, to create for example real manifestations of virtual AI, and for many other purposes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.213.255.7 (talk) 01:50, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

dodecahedron

The article says, "Each bot would be in the shape of a dodecahedron". A regular dodecahedron is not a space-filling shape. The bots would be unable to connect up in a regular way. I wonder if the author means rhombic dodecahedron a shape which can be used to tessellate three-dimensional space. It can be stacked to fill a space much like hexagons fill a plane. Somebody should look into this.--Foobarnix (talk) 18:20, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

The best way to look into this is to remove original research (what I've just done). There are many shapes that tessellate space, and in fact it is argued that non-convex shapes are much better for self-assemblers. Also you are arguing basing on an unsupported premise that they must connect "in a regular way". Also, they can connect in a regular way, just not in a "spacefilling way". Anyway, in the context of the article the phrase is correct: it is how the author (Hall) suggested them. If you find in his writing an explanation for his choice, this would be great. -M.Altenmann >t

The ur-description is (I believe) in Extropy magazine, which I have in a box somewhere ... —Tamfang (talk) 21:48, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Ufog forms structures by joining arms, not by filling space with its bodies. If the arms' bases are arranged at centres of a regular dodecahedron (or, perhaps more easily visualized, vertices of a regular icosahedron), then to form an octet truss each arm must swivel by – if my computation is correct – 13°17ʹ. —Tamfang (talk) 21:48, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Should summarise 3rd party discussion/criticism

Have other people/experts made reasoned criticism (or endorsement) of Halls utility fog ? How have the ideas developed since 1994 ? - Rod57 (talk) 09:30, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Priority

I am pretty sure I saw this idea floated on usenet, back in the 80s. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 12:43, 29 June 2019 (UTC).

• Yes I found a post in 89, by John S. H. Puts the whole thing back 4 years (not sure this is the post I was thinking about, but it's still useful). The idea had serious flaws then, as now, but that's irrelevant.

All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 12:54, 29 June 2019 (UTC).

"Nanorobots"

Article cleary states that foglets are microscale devices, yet the article refers to them as nanorobots. It's an obvious error. 2A02:A31A:C1E3:7300:4859:C337:DCC6:71E1 (talk) 20:13, 21 August 2024 (UTC)