Topic: Cyborgs, Androids, and Robots. Oh my!

Posted under Tag/Wiki Projects and Questions

Alright, this is something that's been bugging me for a while, and I don't really know what to do with it. So I figured I should bring it up for discussion.

I'm sure you can all see where this is going from the title, but there's a lot of confusion and mistagging going on between the "mechanical creature" type tags, specifically android, cyborg, and robot, but I'm also going to drag mech into this. I think it's about time we clear up these tags, and we need to come to some kind on consensus before I go and start changing things.

The big issue in my eyes is that the wikis are MOSTLY correct, but don't offer any guidance on how to properly tag borderline cases. There's also just a lot of simple mistagging, and I'm probably going to have to take that up on a tagging project. For quick reference, here are the wiki definitions.

Current Definitions

Android: A robot with the characteristics of a human. This differs from a cyborg, which is a living creature with mechanical components.

Cyborg: A cyborg is a being with both biological and artificial (e.g. electronic, mechanical or robotic) parts.

Robot: A robot is a mechanical intelligent agent which can perform tasks on its own, or with guidance. In practice a robot is usually an electro-mechanical machine which is guided by computer and electronic programming. Robots can be autonomous or semi-autonomous and come in those two basic types: those which are used for research into human-like systems, such as ASIMO and TOPIO, as well as those into more defined and specific roles, such as Nano robots and Swarm robots; and helper robots which are used to make or move things or perform menial or dangerous tasks, such as Industrial robots or mobile or servicing robots. Another common characteristic is that, by its appearance or movements, a robot often conveys a sense that it has intent or agency of its own.

Mech: NA

Here are the issues and my suggested fixes. I want to get people's opinion on these before I go and start changing wikis and creating implications/aliases all over the place.

Android
  • It implies robot, but that implication doesn't exist yet. I think we can all agree that there should be an implication of Android -> robot.
  • It specifically states that it's a robot with "human" characteristics. Since this is a furry site, I think the word "human" in the wiki needs to be changed to "humanoid" or possibly "anthropomorphic" to actually make sense. I think I'd prefer to switch it to "humanoid" but what do you think?
  • Can androids be four legged? Is this post #176731 an android? I vote that androids, by definition, should be "humanoid." Ie, bipedal, with an upright posture, and somewhat resemble a human figure. The word android comes from the words "andro" and "eids," which mean "human" and "shape" respectively, therefore adding feral robotic creatures to this list goes directly against the word's actual definition and etymology.
    • The wiki should reflect whether or not we decide if 'feral' androids should not be a thing.
    • Perhaps we should come up with another tag for "robots resembling animals" or something. I don't have a good suggestion.
  • Androids are also usually attributed with complete autonomy, not needing to have a human pilot. They're also usually self aware. It is also often implied that they have a form of free will and near human level intelligence and reasoning, sapient if you will. I think this should be added to the wiki, but it's a little subjective. What do you think?
  • Would transformers be androids? By this definition, I think they would. Just very large androids.
  • Herein lies the gray zone, what are the visual differences between an android and a cyborg? When a character has some biological looking bits to it, but also has some cybernetic bits to it, where do we draw the line between the two? Since we can only tag what we see, it gets a bit hard to differentiate the two without knowing the character's underlying blueprints. For example, General Grevious from Star Wars looks like an android, a robot designed to look and operate like a "human" type being. But he actually has a few organic parts to him, so he's technically a cyborg, right? Yes, but you can't usually see that, unless you get a closeup of his biological eyes, or a view of the few actual organs contained in his chest. I'd say that, in most cases, creatures like Grevious should be tagged android on e621. However, things like synthetic skin and cybernetic implants underneath real skin muddy the waters even further.
    • The Wiki needs to give a better description of the visual differences, but I'm not sure of the wording. How about "An android possesses no obviously biological or organic parts, but instead is made up of only mechanical or cybernetic pieces. A cyborg, on the other hand, must show some kind of organic component, ie a bran, or organs, or obviously organic skin."
  • Example pictures should be added for obvious androids, and gray area exceptions.
    • post #384745 is obviously an android, not a single organic part to be seen.
    • post #323499 is a little in the gray area, in that you can see some pieces that MIGHT be organic, or might be synthetic. This post should probably be tagged as android, since the lines and buttons on the skin imply that it is fake, meaning that the entire creature is probably non organic, just engineered to look like it.
    • post #452354 is probably a cyborg, and not an android. The only obviously mechanic bit is her arm, and everything else is most likely biological

Suggested new wiki definition:
"An android is a robot with mainly humanoid characteristics, including a bipedal stance and an upright posture. Robots that have animal characteristics, like zoids for example, are not androids because they are not humanoid. Most androids are self aware and often times sapient, but at the very least they display self-sufficiency, not being piloted or controlled by an outside source, but instead from an internal computer.
Not to be confused with Cyborgs, which are biological creatures with artificial components instead of fully robotic.

Example images here"

Cyborg
  • This one's mostly good, but I think that it needs to implement a good definition, and a lot of tag cleaning up.
  • Last two points of the android suggestions above should also be added here. Check androids above.

Suggested new wiki definition:
"A cyborg is a being with both biological and artificial (e.g. electronic, mechanical, or robotic) parts.
Not to be confused with Androids, which are fully artificial creatures, instead of a combination of biological and artifical parts.

Example images here"

Robot
  • This wiki is needlessly wordy. It should be trimmed down and better formatted and generally cleaned up in it's presentation. Too many little fixes to name.
  • Android should be implicated to robot
  • The last sentence of the wiki states: "Another common characteristic is that, by its appearance or movements, a robot often conveys a sense that it has intent or agency of its own." I disagree with this sentence, both with the word's actual definition, and the rest of the wiki. How does a nano bot display intent? How does this robot display even an iota of agency? No, I think that this line should be reserved for androids.
  • The robot tag is chock-full of creatures that are very, very human looking. Shouldn't they be androids? Where do we draw the line between an android and a robot?
    • I propose that the robot tag should be used for mechanical things/creatures that are not trying to emulate human physiology. Like post #257117 is clearly a robot, but not an android, as is (warning, pony gore) post #394556, though it could be argued that the pony flesh is still living and is therefore a cyborg... looks dead to me though Jim.
    • The robot tag could be what catches all the non-human creature analogue robots.
    • However, I also think that the robot tag should be used for things that might look vaguely human in form, but far more robot than man. Like post #504142... or is that a mech? See next section.
    • Wiki should outline above sub-points.

This one is going to require a lot of manual cleaning up I think.

Suggested new wiki definition:

"A robot is an intelligent mechanical agent which can either perform tasks on its own, or with guidance. In practice, a robot is usually an electro-mechanical machine gided by a computer.
Robots can be autonomous or semi-autonomous and come in three basic types
Worker robots, which are often used for manual labor that is too dangerous or exact for biological laborers. Examples include be industrial robots or the Boston Dynamics "Big Dog."
Helper robots, which are generally tools used to aid skilled professionals or carry out very specific tasks that couldn't be achieved any other way. Examples would include nano-bots and robotic surgery tables.
Creature Analog robots, the kind most likely to grace the pages of e6. These robots are made for various reasons, but generally resemble natural creatures in some small way. They are not androids, because they're not designed with the sole function of being a human like "living" creature, they are generally designed with other functions in mind, and do not have a humanoid form.

Example images here."

Mech

*Mech should implicate robot. I can't find any examples on e6 where this is not the case.

  • Mecha aliased to Mech, since they're the same thing
  • Currently no wiki. I think that it should state something like this: (taken mostly from urban dictionary)

" A Mech is a large, mobile, tank like robot that usually walks on 2 legs, though there are some variations that walk on 4 or even 6 legs, and even fewer are simply a humanoid upper torso mounted on tank treads. Most Mechs tower over humans, often standing about 60 feet tall but are always at least twice their pilot's height. They are also controlled by a human pilot, or by remote. Self aware, non-piloted mechs are actually just large androids. Mechs are generally vehicles of war, armed with weapons and heavily armored. The military is no doubt working on a prototype Mech as I type this."

Also, I very well may have missed some important tags related to robots and such. If I did, please let me know!

Updated

Also, What in the world are these?

post #171633 post #233608 post #172604
On that last one, you can see some kind of... carbon fiber(?) texture to her skin, but for all other cases she just looks like a dragon anthro with armor to me.

post #359351
I... I have no idea.

(Edit: Apparently the Angela dragon thingie is apparently tagged as a gynoid... which is a "very realistic human female android." Riiiiight. I think that should be aliased to InvalidTag.

Updated by anonymous

I don't think robots necessarily have to be intelligent, and I think an entity could be both an android and a creature analogue robot. Other than that, I can agree with everything here. I'd have to read the wiki definitions first before deciding my opinion on whether or not they really need to be changed, but if they do, those look like pretty good replacements.
As for the example posts, I think post #394556 (The pony gore one) could be tagged cyborg (Though an argument for robot alone could be made), Angela seems to be an android, but the tag what you see rules could mean that she'd need to be tagged as a cyborg or just a regular dragon (Though popular opinion seems to be leaning toward android Edit:Wait, no, they just tagged her as everything), and that last one by LandingZone looks like a cyborg to me.
You really put a lot of work and thought into this, and that is not unappreciated!

Updated by anonymous

Phantom_Janitor said:
I don't think robots necessarily have to be intelligent, and I think an entity could be both an android and a creature analogue robot. Other than that, I can agree with everything here. I'd have to read the wiki definitions first before deciding my opinion on whether or not they really need to be changed, but if they do, those look like pretty good replacements.
As for the example posts, I think post #394556 (The pony gore one) could be tagged cyborg (Though an argument for robot alone could be made), Angela seems to be an android, but the tag what you see rules could mean that she'd need to be tagged as a cyborg or just a regular dragon (Though popular opinion seems to be leaning toward android), and that last one by LandingZone looks like a cyborg to me.
You really put a lot of work and thought into this, and that is not unappreciated!

This took like 2 hours to write up, and the darn website kept giving me grief about security checks every time I tried to edit it D: But thank you!

You make a good point about the robots. I left that part in from the old wiki without thinking about it. I would agree that "thinking" should probably be left out

I know Angela is tehnically an android, but she really doesn't exactly look like one to me. I think I'd probably go with dragon and armor myself. I agree with you on the pony, and the LandingZone one as well.

But now I'm going to bed, I have work tomorrow and I spent way too much time writing this up.

Updated by anonymous

Genjar

Former Staff

Yep, we need definitions that work with twys. The proposed ones seem good; as long as the robot definition is changed to also cover the non-intelligent ones.

post #394556: Robot wearing a pony skin? Still a robot.

I also agree with what Tokaido wrote about Angela: she looks like a dragon wearing some armor. Could be an android, but if there's no way to tell, then she shouldn't be tagged as one.

And yes, android should implicate robot.

Updated by anonymous

Laymen's terms.

Robot - automaton with preset functions or direct manual input

Android - automaton, mainly humanoid, with "sentience"

Mech - vehicle, mainly humanoid, controlled by pilot

Cyborg - living being with mechanical parts

Essentially, they can be thought of as the same regarding people, anthro and feral. Robots are feral. They are primitive and have little to no human parts. Androids are anthro, still mostly robots but nearly person. Cyborgs are people with little tidbits added (think cat ears or a tail).

In summation, +1

Android -> Robot
As
Anthro -> Species

Mechs could probably be implicated with a vehicle tag. Presumably tank.

Updated by anonymous

I think people would look at you funny if you tagged a Transformer as an android. What of Transformers such as Ravage or Laserbeak who don't have a humanoid mode yet are just as sentient as their fellow mechanical lifeforms? Do Maximals and Predacons, with their particular mix of mechanical and biological, qualify as cyborgs?

None of the above are automatons since Transformers are all sentient. People don't think of Transformers as androids or cyborgs, but as robots, no matter what their shape is or how much biological matter is glued to their bodies.

Possibile Definitions for probable rejection:

Robot ~ A mechanical device or entity capable of independent or semi-independent movement. This is basically the machine version of a species tag and covers robots from mindless industrial machines to fully sentient (if currently fictional) lifeforms. For specific types of robots or similar beings, see individual entries. [List of various robot types as well as cyborgs.]

Androids ~ An artificial lifeform in the shape of a human or anthropomorphic character. Contrary to popular belief, androids are not necessarily mechanical in nature, but e621 tags them as robots for convenience's sake. Generally speaking, the robotic types can be summed up as looking humanoid/anthropomorphic in appearance without armor or vehicle pieces added on. Gynoids are simply androids with a female appearance. Transformers generally do not count as androids but can be thought of as the borderline case between android and just robotic. Robots in the shape of ferals are not considered androids no matter their intelligence.

Mech ~ A type of vehicle in a shape that is partially or fully humanoid or otherwise anthropomorphic. Usually, they are piloted, but they can also be remotely controlled. They generally lack sentience, can't function without guidance, and can be considered the borderline between robot and vehicle. E621 tags them as robot because they tend to look like common notions of what a robot looks like.

Cyborg ~ Technically not a robot, but a partially biological, partially mechanical entity. They can basically be considered to be biological beings with robot bits added on. Robots with biological bits added on (eg. Beast Wars Transformers) are not considered cyborgs.

Proposals (undoubtedly to also be rejected, but that's life):

Automaton ~ Any robot incapable of intelligent behavior, be it simulated or actual.

Mechanoid ~ Any robot that is too mechanical in appearance to be an android, is capable of motion independent of a pilot or controller, and can simulate, if not actually perform, intelligent behavior.

Updated by anonymous

^^^ I agree.

But is the animatronics in Five Nights At Freddy's count robots or androids?

They are robots that entertain children while on free roam mode, they seem to be "sentient" and have the abilities to run, stalk, stare and kill(rip your face off).

Updated by anonymous

The_Great_Wolfgang said:
But is the animatronics in Five Nights At Freddy's count robots or androids?

They are robots that entertain children while on free roam mode, they seem to be "sentient" and have the abilities to run, stalk, stare and kill(rip your face off).

Considering that's how they're typically portrayed, I'd suggest androids (robot would be automatically added anyway). However, it might be a good idea to also add animatronics as another species tag since that could be considered a specific "species" of robot and/or android.

My current rule of thumb is that Transformers are on the "just robot" side of the fine line and androids such as Marvel's Ultron and that gynoid from Metropolis (I think) is on the android side.

Updated by anonymous

Genjar

Former Staff

Wouldn't Transformers fall into the mech (-> robot) category? Except for being autonomous, they don't differ much from an average mech...

Updated by anonymous

Genjar said:
Wouldn't Transformers fall into the mech (-> robot) category? Except for being autonomous, they don't differ much from an average mech...

Can you drive a transformer outside of "car" mode? I thought about that myself, but I can't say I've ever seen one piloted. Then there are SD Gundams which are normally mechs but are pretty much living and breathing in that series.

Updated by anonymous

Clawstripe said:
I think people would look at you funny if you tagged a Transformer as an android. What of Transformers such as Ravage or Laserbeak who don't have a humanoid mode yet are just as sentient as their fellow mechanical lifeforms? Do Maximals and Predacons, with their particular mix of mechanical and biological, qualify as cyborgs?

None of the above are automatons since Transformers are all sentient. People don't think of Transformers as androids or cyborgs, but as robots, no matter what their shape is or how much biological matter is glued to their bodies.

Possibile Definitions for probable rejection:
Proposals (undoubtedly to also be rejected, but that's life):

I like your suggestions, the first three anyway. Very well written. The last two are fine but I'm not sure there's much use for them on e6.

Updated by anonymous

  • 1