But until that day comes, we have to put up with creepy looking robots that give us artificial smiles and do inane things like give us directions, dance or solve a Rubik’s Cube in 35 seconds.

The RuBot 2 from inventor Pete Redmond is designed with the specific task of solving a Rubik’s Cube. It uses two hi-res cameras to scan all six sides of a cube, then uses some artificial intelligence software to work out how to solve the puzzle. Then, its pneumatic arms flick the cube from side to side, making rapid-fire adjustments to the cube until the problem is solved.

The whole process takes 35 seconds, which is well off the human record of 9.55 seconds. To us, it doesn’t look like this robot will be taking part in the demise of humankind, when people have its number so convincingly. Keep practising RuBot 2…

[Tech.co.uk]

Sean Fallon: Why Rubik’s?
Zachary Paisley: The idea for the Rubik’s Cube came about from shopping for subs and looking at what DIY-ers were doing with their builds—in two words, “boring me.” The entire thought process behind most DIY-ers, especially when it comes to audio, is to make it look like a major manufacturer built it, to make it blend into the background. I saw one man who turned his end table into a sub and another who built it into his desk. I thought “why not take the opposite approach?” Rather than have people ignore something I made; I want them to REALLY notice it. From there, the specific design for the Rubik’s Cube just came to me as I was driving to work; it seemed a perfect fit.

SF: What was the most difficult aspect of the project?
ZP: I have been building sculptures and other artworks since high school but this was my first speaker build—two completely different ball games. To be honest though, the design, calculations, building—none of that was out of reach for me. The hardest part was convincing everyone who was watching (family, girlfriend, roommates, a pissed off landlord, even more pissed off neighbors) that I wasn’t insane and attempting something like this WAS a good idea—I received a lot of flack for it.

SF: Did you encounter any major problems with the build along the way?
ZP:Yes—two. The first I encountered halfway through. I worked out the dimensions of the sub to be a scale representation of the puzzle, but miscalculated the thickness of the wood needed for the outer squares. I had to increase the thickness of the outer shell, which forced me to increase the thickness of the inner shell. It cost me five days’ work. The biggest mistake, though small (no pun intended), was the end-weight. I guessed about 75 lbs and bought legs that I thought would work. After attaching them (without the driver/amp) the legs practically ripped out from the 100 lb shell just from blowing on it. I put in some bun feet meant for couches and haven’t had any problems since.

SF:You talked about it a bit on your project site, but give us a quick idea of the sound quality one could expect from the Rubik’s Subwoofer.
ZP: In a word—”Danceable.” Just Kidding! Admittedly, I was trying to not get my hopes up but was quite surprised by the quality. I had listened to other subs on my system before for testing purposes and they taught me not to get one for stereo purposes. This sub, however, has turned me the other way. After playing around a bit with the stuffing/phase/crossover, I was able to so seamlessly blend the sub to my other speakers. My goal here all along was to make a sub that I could use with my music and not a god-awful booming box heard two miles away. In all seriousness, it’s got some great sound and I’d happily put it next to anything bought for thousands more at an audiophile hangout, maybe I’ll even offer a million dollars if they can prove it’s better.

[SF: Sounds like a challenge! I'd put my money on Zachary though.]

SF:Would you ever consider selling your creation, or making another for a paying customer?
ZP: I’ve been told to market it by a few people and I even received an offer. I don’t know if I could ever sell the prototype though, it’s quite special to me. As for making another for a paying customer, I’d love to—I had a blast making this one. It was really the first time I got to blend my art into A/V engineering (what I do professionally). In fact, I had so much fun making this I’m currently working on the equations and drawings for two stereo fronts in the likeness of Coca Cola vending machines, one old fashioned and one newer. In all seriousness, I would definitely make a sculptured speaker for someone who wanted one.

SF: So how about making a subwoofer out of Legos—the tech geek’s other favourite toy?
ZP: I had SOO many Legos as a boy! Of course the catch to Legos is which one do you model after—they come out with new types of bricks every five minutes! Legos would make a GREAT system—5.1: long bricks for the fronts, the four-prong square for the sub and the angled ones for the rears. Good call! Want me to build you one, Sean?

[SF: Hell, yeah, I would like a Lego subwoofer. Make a few in fact. I'll put them together and make the coolest Lego fort ever.]

SF: Can you even solve a Rubik’s Cube?
ZP: The closest I ever came to solving a Rubik’s Cube as a child was ripping the colours off to match the sides I needed them to. I actually bought a cube for photo purposes last week and before I had the chance to photograph it, my girlfriend jumbled it beyond recognition…two hours later I found a website that allows you to map the sides and then gives you the method for solving it. Thank God.

Hit the following link for a complete list of build instructions. [Project Cube 2007]

Slowly.
The Eighties aren’t just a decade, they’re a state of mind.
Mullet just sounds so derogatory, don’t you think?
Nope, Sudoku’s too much for me.
Wham! Bam! I Am! A Man!
A man who is tired of stonewashed denim is tired of life.

Product Page [Rakuten via Tokyo Mango]

At the same place we spotted the Rubik’s not-so-magic table, we also found this awesomely sexy version of the Cube. I want one, and you can buy it online for as little as US$5.95. Sweet.

Product Page [via Babygadget]

As far as geek side tables go, surely this is a winner. But at US$600, it’s probably better to take it as inspiration for a bit of home handy work. Particularly because this would really rock if you turned one side into a set of drawers, or gave it a secret internal compartment, or something other than it just being a solid block table.

I think it’s time I start my own line of geek furniture. -Seamus Byrne

Product Page [Babesta via BabyGadget]

Going the complete opposite direction from the Idiot’s Cube, this irregular cube is a Rubik’s cube that you need to solve with both colour and shape. Called the Irregular IQ Cube, this strange geometric shape is supposed to end up like a standard Rubik’s Cube when solved, but looks like a kid’s science project when not. For only $US8.50, you too can have a cube that rolls off your table every day to remind you that you should have studied harder in school.

See it in action after the jump.

– Jason Chen

Product Page [Brando]
]]> http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2007/05/the_irregular_rubiks_cube/feed/ 2 http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2007/05/rubiks_cube_the_idiots_cube/ http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2007/05/rubiks_cube_the_idiots_cube/#comments Tue, 01 May 2007 23:15:52 +0000 Seamus Byrne http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2007/05/rubiks_cube_the_idiots_cube.html Rubik’s Cubes too hard to solve? Try out this Idiot’s Cube, and you’ll never feel inferior to Will Smith again. Plus, it’s a pretty inexpensive way to tell someone they’re too stupid to figure out a real puzzle. Just in time for Mother’s Day! – Jason Chen

Product Page [Cool Things]