How Women Are Leading The Effort To Make Robots More Humane
By bringing their talents to the male-dominated engineering field, women are sparking innovation.
by Carla Diana
Most designers and engineers have childhood stories about fantastic
Lego creations or amazing home-built projects that hinted at their early
propensity toward design. For me, my nascent interest in mechanics
manifested itself in my Matchbox car collection. One day, a neighbor's
mother saw me with my miniature parking lot and cried, "Cars are for
boys! Those aren't for you!"
Decades later, I still remember that moment. It was my first real
awareness that my penchants didn’t fulfill gender expectations. But I
wasn’t deterred. I embraced my “oddball” identity all the way through
engineering school (where I was one of two women in a class of 40),
through industrial design studies, and into job roles that have always
been challenging, inspiring, fundamentally technical, and
male-dominated.
A shift toward "socially aware machines" has drawn women to robotics.
Though
I take pride in my career path, I remember facing a good deal of
confidence-dashing resistance from people with old-fashioned gender
definitions. Unfortunately, many young women and girls defer to these
expectations. According to the Industrial Design Society of America,
only 11.5% of its professional members are women and the more technical
areas of design have even fewer. In a recent Fast Company article,“Ladies Who Hack,”
Jed Lipinksi describes how social stigmas can prevent women from
getting into programming: “Less than 20% of undergraduate
computer-science and engineering degrees are given to women, and big
tech companies are almost entirely run by men.”
With so few women designing hardware/software solutions, it’s no
wonder that many women don’t relate well to the products being made. In
fact, a poll at the 2004 Consumer Electronics Show found that only 1% of
women felt that manufacturers had them in mind when they were
developing electronic products. This divide between the designers
(mainly technically oriented men) and the users of electronic stuff (the
rest of the population) limits the full potential of technology. To
bolster the development of game-changing developments, the field needs
to attract a more diverse group of developers and designers, especially
more women.
New tools, new attitudes
During the early 2000s, I lived in San Francisco. I reveled in the emerging art and technology scenes and observed how a revised take on DIY
led to new attitudes toward technology. It put electronics know-how in
the hands of a more diverse demographic. At the same time, the new Arduino platform
for electronics was taking the community by storm, making it easier
than ever to wire up your own robot or gizmo. Then the launch of Make Magazine spread technical DIY information to an even broader audience. Make’s founder, Dale Dougherty, wanted to do for electronics hacking what Popular Mechanics
did for wood craftsmanship. While of the magazine contained spreads
reminiscent of 1950s tableaus of fathers and sons making stuff in garage
shops (a poignant reminder of how making wasn't for girls), a new
explosion of accessible tools and publicly available technical
information actually attracted more women to the field.
The LilyPad Arduino
Around the same time Make came around, a variation of Arduino, called the LilyPad Arduino, was being developed by Leah Buechely at MIT's Hi-Lo Tech lab.
Buchely focused on creating a platform for electronics that could be
embedded in clothing and soft goods. By replacing wires with conductive
thread--a simple but fundamental change--electronic components like
lights and speakers and switches could be sewn directly into the fabric.
Because most people already know basic sewing (whereas wiring and
soldering can require new learning), the LilyPad opened the electronics
scene to a far greater number of participants.
65% of LilyPad creators were female. For basic Arduino? 2%.
This
was particularly exciting for girls. Because the system is based on
sewing (a traditionally "female" activity), an entire set of skills
around technology and science suddenly became more accessible to girls.
Wearable computing classes saw the number of girls rise and thrive in
workshops previously favored by boys. Unsurprisingly, in 2010, the MIT
researcher Benjamin Mako Hill found 65% of LilyPad-based project
creators were female, compared to only 2% for the basic Arduino.
Hill describes the phenomenon further in "On Feminism and Microcontrollers,"
claiming that LilyPad projects are more imaginative, since the
inventions and applications are more unexpected and come from a more
diverse group of creators. He writes, “Although LilyPad and Arduino are
the same chips and the same code, we suggest that LilyPad's design, and
the way the platform is framed, leads to different types of projects
that appeal to different types of people. For example, Arduino seems
likely to find its way into an interaction design project or a fighting
robot. LilyPad seems more likely to find its way into a smart and
responsive textile.”
A sample embroidery project centered around the Lilypad Arduino board. Photo and embroidery by Becky Stern.
Social robots open new doors
Robotics has also been a traditionally male-dominated clubhouse. But
in the past two decades, a shift toward "socially aware machines"
(social robotics) has drawn women to the field. As technology has
enabled more sophisticated programmed behaviors, machines have evolved
to interact with us by communicating through spoken words, gestures, and
other social cues.
These robots blend hard-core computer science with an understanding
of psychology and social science--fields that have generally appealed
more to women. It’s therefore not surprising that many of the leaders in
this field, like Cynthia Breazeal, Andrea Thomaz, and Jodi Forlizzi,
are women. In this specialty, being able to empathize and express
emotion is just as important as knowing mechanics and computer
programming, and like the LilyPad, these female-centric skill sets have
opened the door for women to succeed in an area where they were
previously underrepresented.
The mix of social and electronic skills I learned designing robots is something that I use daily.
I, too, was intrigued by this area, so I joined the core team for the creation of Simon,
a socially aware robot, while I was teaching at the Georgia Institute
of Technology. The Simon project focuses on crafting a machine that
people can interact with in a natural, human way. You can gesture in
front of it, talk to it, and even hand it objects. The robot responds
with emotional expressions that are easy for humans to comprehend, like
shrugging its shoulders when it doesn’t understand, blinking a colored
light when it recognizes an object, or even talking. It has a humanoid
form, meaning that it sports arms, hands, a torso, and a head with
eyelids and eyeballs that move to show what the robot is “thinking.” It
can recognize objects and actively learn instructions on what to
do--like putting certain colored objects in a matching colored bin--just
through interacting with people.
The goal is to have a robot that doesn’t require any learning to use,
because you interact with it intuitively, the way you would another
person. The mix of social and electronic skills I learned during the
robot design work is something that I use daily in my work at Smart
Design, and it’s becoming more valuable to industry as people have come
to expect their products to communicate and respond in more
sophisticated ways through light, sound, screens, and movement.
My very first project at Smart Design happened to be for a company called Neato Robotics,
a client that understood the importance of building an emotional
connection between people and products. With many groundbreaking
features that would be new to consumers, the team focused on how it
could best communicate what the product was doing in human terms by
using words, iconography, and even facial expressions. Though the Simon
project was driven by academic research, I have been able to draw a
great deal of learning from the field of social robotics and apply it to
products that we use in our everyday lives by thinking about ways that
products can have expressive behaviors and then building an abstracted
version of those animated responses into the design.
Simon
is a socially aware humanoid robot platform currently under development
at the Georgia Institute of Technology in the Socially Intelligent
Machines Lab, led by Dr. Andrea Thomaz (right).
The future of technology
Seeing the changing attitudes toward girls and technology has been
especially exciting for me. Although I had no exposure to woodshop
classes and building techniques in high school, my own alma mater, the Marymount School for Girls
in New York City, recently approached me to discuss their plans to
install a "Fab Lab," a workshop built around fabrication techniques such
as laser cutting and 3-D printing. The idea of girls having this
formative, hands-on experience in digital making and design technology
is an indication that the skills associated with science, technology
engineering, and math are no longer considered male-only. "Girls are
just as good as boys at this stuff," says Jaymes Dec, the program
manager at Greenfab, an NSF-funded Fab Lab for high school students in
the Bronx. "They are great at working through logic and manipulating
small parts like electronics with their hands."
By involving girls today, we are preparing more women for
technology-focused design fields in the future. Areas that have long
been male-dominated will surely see a rise in women, due to shifts in
tools, skill sets, and collaborative systems. This involvement will not
only change demographics but contribute new innovations and business
opportunities, which will undoubtedly emerge from fresh attitudes and
approaches to science and technology. And soon we’ll hear that many more
than 1% of women feel that manufacturers took them into account when
designing an electronic gadget.
No comments:
Post a Comment