The first robot that I would know was the terminator (Arnold Schwarzenegger) - it came out to kill people.
Robotics has always been a fun concept for humanity - a tin man who can do anything, but not as long as it has intelligent.
Arnie's terminator was able to deliver the impact, reminding us that everything comes with a price - the other robots are less than impressive.
So, Arnie's came out to tell us about the possibility that robots, once self-aware, may turn against the creator.
Nevertheless, that is yet to be sure.
Everything starts with the need to automate - If you do not agree with me, you wouldn't be using a computer.
As the computer, IT and technology industry progress, automated robotics and eventually A.I robotics are the natural progressions.
Just think about Google's driverless car vs Uber - which one is most useful and exciting?
I think both are useful and exciting, and they share a common outcome: people who make a living as drivers will feel the heat of obsolete.
Hence, automation is the good guy because it helps us do things which we otherwise had no time or unable to do. On the other hand, A.I is a threat because it potentially makes human obsolete.
Nonetheless, human are already obsolete. Why?
We have everything now, but most people are not happy - we live according to what the society deems worthy.
Almost everybody who is plugged to the current capitalist system chases after the same thing: money and vanity - there isn't time to appreciate beautiful virtue than to expedite the urge to enjoy life more and more.
Having arrived here, it dawned on me that the problem lies in how we define enjoyment? Must we enjoy what majority think true?
All the rich and famous are already talking about A.I and robotics now; for example, Elon Musks warned threats; Larry Page spoke about the socio-economic effects of advanced intelligent systems can result in abundance; Bill Gates agreed that robotics is a good area to focus on and Mark Zuckerberg is currently busy creating a prototype on personal assistant according to his own standard.
Hence, everybody is at it, if you are not, you are obsolete. Period.
I am a software engineer by practice, and I do not oppose technology advancement, otherwise, the works that I do will end up not creating values for anything.
I value my achievement through the gratification that I have solved a current issue permanently - as long as my codes survive, the issue has a solution and the issue is deemed obsolete.
Naturally, as we progress in terms of software engineering and programming, automation and A.I are always the next thing to look forward.
Yes, humanity is already indulged, we have taken it for granted as always and now we are technology slaves.
Sometimes ago, while justifying the case for automation, A.I and robotics, I was met with a scenario.
I walked into a petrol station to buy some stuff and I ended up feeling unsatisfied.
The attendants weren't interested in serving me well and I was left offended.
Perhaps a little over sentimental, I soon realized that they probably had their personal reasons - perhaps they were just not interested in doing the job.
Then suddenly I understood the case for robotics evolution - why not let the robots do it and everybody feel happy?
During the IROS 2014 (IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems), the conference presented to the world that robotics research is into everything and healthcare industry is one with heavy focus.
In retrospect, it doesn't matter who are not interested in their jobs, what I do know is that robots can do chores and works which no one wants to do or had no time to.
And these activities include the caring of the elderly - nobody cares about the elderly anymore.
Good luck humanity; good luck robotics.
Check out more on Financial Times' robotics.