A

Christine's talking with Christian Hyubicki, roboticist and professor at Florida State University and two time Survivor competitor on this episode of Outside of the Box. That passion, that authenticity that so many of us who love engineering and STEM share is a lot more infectious than we realize.

B

Hello, everyone, and welcome to another episode of Outside of the Box. And it is kind of rare that I get to blend multiple areas of passions that I have or have had in the past. Not everybody that watches this show knows that. I used to be a pretty heavy fan of Survivor and a unique opportunity that I had was my, my guest today who is very into robotics and also happened to be on Survivor twice. So I have Christian Houbicki here with me to talk about mostly robots, but, you know, some Survivors. So welcome to the show.

A

It's great to be here. So some mix of both where we will go, where it goes. No, it's great to be here. I appreciate the invite, of course.

B

So I'm definitely really excited to dive into this. The first thing that I really want to talk about is I know that a big area of passion for you within robotics is specifically bipedal robots and like how we, you know, where we can go with that and certain applications of that. And I'm curious to talk about not just that, but like, with the onset of AI becoming so big, what your thoughts are about, you know, incorporating that into those types of robots as well. You know, what, what are your thoughts on that?

A

Well, it's a great question and in fact the question. It's been quite the exploding industry recently, but let's get into it. So, yeah, my background is in bipedal robots. That's where I got my PhD and I have a robotic. I have a dual degree PhD in robotics engine and mechanical engineering. And I specifically, I did my PhD in trying to get robots on two legs to walk better. And we would use specific algorithms that made it better at balancing and being more efficient when it would walk around. And we also studied how animals would run on two legs. I mean, you know, we're animals, we run on two legs, but also things like ostriches and things like that. So the goal is, so why have something on two legs other than the fact that we think it's cool and for. Frankly, I think it's cool. It's probably why I got into the field. But the idea is that you want to be able to send a robot where anywhere a person could go, but maybe it's a really bad idea right now, you know, maybe really like trying to hike out into the woods trying to find someone who's missing. You know, the thing about, like when you're walking on two legs, you can be upright, you can use your hands to climb, you know, grab onto a tree to then step over and step over like a log, um, or for instance a burning building. You know, we build our buildings with stairs and you need someone to maybe barge into the building and check and see if someone's inside you. If there is someone inside, inside, you need someone to something to pick them up and then carry them out. And two legs is a great way to be upright and go through these human like environments. But the thing is, robots in general are not as good as people getting around on two legs. And you know, you know, for every fantastic video there is of a robot getting around, there are also wonderful videos of robots falling down. Okay, now you mentioned AI. Now AI is a big umbrella term. I think we often, maybe your audience might think of these, you know, these chatgpt, these chatbots, these algorithms that will make, that'll make pictures for you based upon prompts. And those are in fact incredible. But in fact, the thing that has made robots walk around much better more recently is a much simpler version of what you might call AI. It still uses neural networks. But the neural networks aren't these billion parameter models that are using that. They put, that they put in these giant, they execute on these giant data centers. They're much smaller, they'll fit on a computer that fits inside of a robot. And their only job is to say this is where this was. This is the way I'm posed right now. This is the way I'm moving. Where should I put my leg? How much should I move my arm to the side? That's all it's doing. It's much simpler, it's a much simpler algorithm. But, but, but they made the robots much more reliable getting around. But are they reliable enough that we can count on them? And that's where the field is trying to get to get moving on and trying to make these robots much more reliable so we can count on them to do things we need to when we really need to.

B

Right. And honestly I think that when it comes to that type of robot design, like that's where it needs to go. Right? You know, you see a lot of these videos of like some of the stuff that Boston Dynamics is doing or like robots doing judo or you know, whatever the case may be. And that's really cool, you know, that they can make them do that. But I think like the point of having a robot do something that might be unsafe for a person to do that is necessary and have them do that job, you know, to, to save someone or you know, be in a dangerous area and you know, retrieve something like that, I think is the way to go.

A

It certainly is. And at least that's been my opinion for many years. Why I kind of got into the fields. Like it bothered me to my core that like, if I needed to send in something to go check a burning building for someone, the best thing to send in is a real life human being who can get hurt, you know, and we don't have the technology to do something better. So now the thing is, these search and rescue applications we're talking about, you know, they're very important, I believe in them, but they're also much smaller business than industry. Right. Like right now a lot of people, a lot of companies are making these humanoid robots to go in a factory. Literally. The idea is like, if a person can do it, just put in a robot to do it instead and maybe it'll do it faster, maybe it'll do it cheaper at some point. Not yet, but maybe at some point. And so, and that's where it gets to kind of trick your wicket. A stickier wicket, I guess, is the phrase and where you need to. Because you're like, at what point do you need something that walks around? You know, certainly some, some of these tasks, it's good to have hands, you know, to pick up my phone. It's good to have a hand to pick up the phone. And so you will see these massive industries, these billion dollar startups are popping out. It's weird to hear the phrase billion dollar startup, but that's in fact what they are with these billion dollar valuations, something billion dollar investments in these companies. Like, the idea is that we're going to make a humanoid robot that's going to do anything a person could do in a factory. Right now it's still a guess as to whether or not this would work in a way that is economical or is reliable enough. But, but that's where all. Where there's a ton of money in this industry. So. And the banking that someone will crack this problem, but it's a challenging one. And like I alluded to earlier, the big issue is not whether or not you can get a cool YouTube video of a robot, you know, picking up a box, putting it over there, or sorting packages in a factory is one of the more very recent ones by a company called Figure AI. Question is, how reliable Is it? Because. And that. That's the challenge. A big challenge. A lot of robotics, but particularly humanoids and legged robots.

B

Yeah, yeah, for sure. And I think this is a really good topic to bring up because so many people think of those types of robots and think of movies where maybe they were portrayed as like, this is a bad thing. And it's going to like, you know, hurt people if you have ro, you know, robots walking around and doing things. To lead that into my next question, I know that you talk a lot about robots and the way that they're used in film and TV and stuff. I mean, I know like, Short Circuit was a big thing for you growing up. Is there a movie or like more than one movie where you think that they really got robots right?

A

Ooh. I mean, so in terms of getting robots right, I mean, it's, it's. I think that. Geez, it's. I need to have a better example offhand. This is a great question because you're often asked, like, which are the ones that are. That are. That are bad? Like, you know, like, like it's easy to point those out. This is a movie. I want to say they got the robots perfectly right. But I do love the movie Interstellar with. They have the TARS robot. That one's always stood out to me for a number of reasons. Not necessarily because it's the most practical robot. In fact, I think the way it locomotes is if you don't. If you've never seen the movie, imagine two like, like, like two dominoes. Imagine like two dominoes that are connected at the top by. Like a, by like a hinge. So they kind of swing back and forth and that's the way it kind of walks around, kind of swings its leg back and forth, these big block, like domino blocks. It. It does more than that. As the film progresses, you learn these things have a lot more functionality. But it was interesting ideas. Like, hey, we just have a big thing that I think it was, it was. The idea is these are robots that were adapted from these military robots that would basically take a beating. They were basically these big armored blocks. But what it does is it. It's actually a bit of a nod, in my opinion, to how some of these experimental robots originally walked, which were literally just like two joint, like, like two like blocks on a hinge and they kind of swing back and forth past each other. They didn't walk particularly well. But I, by. One thing I liked also is that it basically was a chat bot. Like it would sort of chat with you, you could dial up its personality. I thought that that was, I, that was ahead of its time because that movie came out in 2014 before we had, you know, kind of useful chat bots. But in terms of the locomotion, I think that the movie iRobot, while it catches a lot of flack justifiably for all kinds of reasons, the sort of locomotion that we're seeing from robots jumping around and doing all kinds of things that are in very humanoid way, it actually does a pretty good job with, with that. Like I wouldn't have said that a couple of years ago. It's like the way that they walk is frankly quite human. Like I, I think that if one, one, one movie that's fun to, to think about is actually Pacific Rim where you had giant robots. I, I gave a talk where, where I was talking about like yes, that they tried to, in that movie they tried to pilot these robots around by having people like mimic the way they want to walk. And that's actually like a challenging thing. Cause humans, small, smaller creatures like us compared to these giants building size robots, we swing our legs faster, a lot faster than, than these tiny. At least at different, at a different pace. Sort of like a, like, like a, like a stride frequency. You know, like, like a, like you're like your dog. A tiny dog that's running around is going to have a very fast stride frequency. It's a smaller thing and it's also has four legs but, but, but like, or tiny birds when they run around, they have a very fast stride frequency. When you get bigger, they swing slower. So question is, how do you control a robot that is walks a lot more slowly in terms of stride cycle with a faster moving person? Well, there are actually researchers who looked into this who said hey, if you strap the person into a bit of an exosuit that forces them to walk more slowly, you can use it to, to control a larger robot. Anyway, this is, I'm going off on a bit of a tangent here on a couple of robots I find cool for different reasons, but they all get something wrong I find. There's one, there's none of them have really nailed it.

B

Yeah, that's, that's a fair answer. Now I, I have a friend that specifically told me to ask you, and I was gonna see if you brought it up first, but specifically told me to ask you what you think of the Iron Giant.

A

Oh, well, the Iron Giants is a fun and cartoony one. I mean the thing is like a rocket pack, right? The thing Flies at some point. Right. That I think that. I mean, basically any robot, giant robot that flies, you know, already you could be like, okay, well, that's not going to be a very realistic one because you're. The amount of fuel it takes for something really heavy to get off the ground is enormous. You know, it's like there's a reason that, that, like a rocket that gets off of the ground and gets out into space is mostly fuel that it gets rid of by the time it goes off. But it is a fun one, like, when it's on the ground. So let's get rid of the flying part. Okay. Let's get rid of the flying part for it. I like, but I. I think that it wasn't just a giant walking robot, science fiction style robot walking around. I bet you. I think I would need to look at. One thing I would look for is the stride frequency, how slowly does it step and sort of compare it to a. More like a Pacific Rim, which is probably closer to what it should be. There's an equation for that that I should actually run myself for these movies to compare. Like when you. On one axis, you could have the size of the size of a robot, and then on the, on the, on the, on the vertical axis, you might have the stride frequency or how long. Or how long it takes to take a step, how many seconds. Right. And what you would predict via some of the scaling laws and robotics and see which one of them actually obey it. That would be a cute. A cute little exercise for the viewer at home.

B

Yeah, I would definitely agree with that. It definitely, like that thought process is very mythbusters ask, which is something that, that I certainly grew up on.

A

One thing, Byron, at one point I saw.

B

Yes, Yes, I did. Yeah. One of. One of my personal, you know, heroes in stem. But yeah, one thing again, like, diving into that, it's. It's good because, you know, with the. With the topics and things like that. But I mean, a lot of, like, the things that you saw STEM based when you were growing up and like, playing, you know, with Legos and stuff like that as a kid, that seemed to really influence your path, getting into stem. Talk about that, because I think that's, like, so important. I think a lot of parents don't realize how important. Something like buying a kid a LEGO set is such a great pathway into stem because it really teaches you to think about, you know, the building process and, you know, all of those things and kind of get into those engineering concepts very early.

A

No, 100%. I mean, just getting your hands on something that you can just feel the progress with. Like, you have a creative vision, like, I want to make a dinosaur. Then you're like. And you realize, okay, you have these Legos in front of you. What do you do with it, right? And you might make a dinosaur and you just take a bunch of blocks, you stick them together, you're like, okay, well, it's a dinosaur, but I like it to move its tail. What do I do? It's like, well, I have this thing that, since that I'm going to make, I can put a motor on that, right? That, that, that, that engineering process that you're sort of vibing out, if you will, as a kid is really important. I mean, like that, like, and, and then you learn to challenge yourself to get it to do more things, right? And that's the engineering process, that's the creative process, and that's what's fun about it. And it's never been easier to get involved with all of these things. I mean, like, like, like, you know, but I grew up in, you know, the late 80s is when I was, when I was a real little kid. And you know, there was, there was no Internet as we knew it. You know, I didn't have computer, a computer, no YouTube. But nowadays, you know, there's, you know, there are, there are probably hundreds of YouTube channels that would teach you how to make something cool out of Legos, or you buy an Arduino, you know, for like, for your kid, for like 40 bucks. And to do things like, it's, it's, it's never been easier. And, and the thing that I'll always say when people ask me to, like, how do I get started in robotics? One thing I'll say is just like, get a motor that spins. Like, take a motor, just get it to spin and hook it up to something and do it. Or just, or get a light and turn to. Get a light to blink. And if you get a light to blink, then like, oh, okay, well, now what do I want that light to do? Do I want a bunch of lights that, that, that like light up with like a letter? What would it take to do that? Once you get that first sign of life from that thing that you're trying to, to do, then you're off to the races. What, what's, what's often would get people stuck is like, if you want to learn to code, right? Want to learn to code. If you just get to the print, hello world. To the screen. Hello world. Once you get to hello world, you got you, you, you, you're, you're, you're much better off than you think you are. If you're stuck trying to compile the code and it says error, error, error. That's frustrating. Gets you nowhere. But you need something to show that you've made some progress to yourself and that's what gets you moving.

B

Yeah, yeah, definitely. I think I learned more from watching my kid in first LEGO League and, like, just learning those very basic things of coding and the different things you could do with the little motors like that. That taught me so much that I, that I didn't know before. So, yeah, it's really interesting. And I mean, you spent a lot of time obviously doing First Robotics, and so I'll kind of segue into competitive robotics now. First is obviously competitive, but maybe in a slightly different way than the world that I am often, often in, which is combat robotics. And so I do want to talk a little bit about, you know, number one, are you, like, have you seen BattleBots? Are you a fan of BattleBots? And also, what do you think about, like, for me, the reason why I love it so much is because it is amazing to me that people spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on a robot that they know is going to get destroyed, most likely, and still do it, and love it, because that loss, you know, that, that, you know, outcome teaches them so much about the thing that they've built that helps them to innovate and make something better for the next time. And that's something that I just love so much.

A

I mean, bottom line is great. It's great. I think that where I often focus for people is like, how do you get low barrier for entry? So that way you get people in the door and it can be kind of intimidating for people. It's like, okay, so I'm going to build this robot, but it's going to get destroyed in one match. And the people that love it, that's amazing. And there's a pure. So, like the. Anytime that you're harnessing people's just pure passion, like almost passion, that makes no sense. And I don't mean this about BattleBots specifically. I mean, about anything, right? It's just like, why are you doing this? It's just. But like, no, I love it. And that should intrigue you more. Like the. I mean, I'll pull out just a random example, say, robotics. One thing I love to look up on YouTube are speedruns of video games. I love these things. They're amazing. They are engineering and science projects in and of themselves. And people will spend hundreds or thousands of hours trying to shave off 1 second of time trying to finish a video game. Sometimes you'll do full on computer science research projects to look for a glitch that'll do it. Why would you do that? The fact that it's crazy and they do it anyway is inspiring. Now BattleBots, the the is a much more visceral thrill when you actually succeed. You know, it's just like wow, I beat that robot in a full on combat situation. Right. And the sheer in the extreme engineering is often what, what, what what what is fascinating. Like how you maximize the power output of a hammer that's swinging down on a thing, right. And then when you're watching it there's the tension of who is going to come out alive so to speak and of the battle. So it's wonderful. I, I'm a proponent of all these robotics competitions so far. Is you are safe safety for you first dear engineer, please be safe. When it comes to something like First Robotics, it's designed to be a more nurturing environment by design. Like your robot should theoretically survive the match. Not always, but it should. And when and when you're down and out, all the other teams will often help you get you back up and running. And there are people to help you, right? It's a, it's about having a foster kind of a nurt environment which you can learn and there's all kinds of research that says you know what is a good environment for which you want to learn. And it's one where it is safe to fail. Right now some people are daredevils where they want extremely high stakes of failing. Your robot is completely destroyed and that is something beautiful as well. It's just not if I were recommending, hey, I'm a high school freshman, I want to get into robotics. I would recommend something like a First Robotics or a Vex Robotics where you are where the barrier for entry is lower and the cost of failure is a little less severe. But certainly I have tremendous respect for Robot Wars Battlebots. I mean there's now humanoid robot fighting leagues now, which is a thing I never expected to see.

B

One thing I definitely wanted to get into for sure was obviously we have to talk a little bit about Survivor. But what I wanted to talk about as far as Survivor goes is for me because you know, I've always loved it but I look at it from a very like behavioral science kind of perspective. Every time I've watched it, you know, when I try and look at it from the outside looking in, I'm like, okay, if this person decided to do this strategically, does that make sense? What are the repercussions of choosing to do this, you know, of making this alliance or things like that? So I always look at it very. From an academic perspective and not like just in the moment kind of thing. And I'm kind of curious what you think about that having done it twice as far as, like, the level of reasoning, you have to use the critical thinking skills involved in, like, strategy testing a hypothesis. Because, I mean, like, choosing to say I'm going to, like, be with this alliance, that's a hypothesis that you think that's going to work out and you have to see if it's going to, and you're not sure. So I wanted to get your plan perspective on that.

A

I mean, I could talk endlessly about that. I mean, there's, I mean, one of the, you know, I, I got the pleasure of actually playing Survivor twice, which is crazy to me. And I went on the show because it was, I found it fundamentally interesting for all the reasons that you're saying, like, for those who don't know, you think, think of Survivor, you might think this is like, you know, it's often conflated with like, naked and afraid where you, you're, you're, you're out. You're out in the wilderness. Yes. You're out in the wilderness. Yes. You got to, you got to survive on the food that's around. There's. All those things are true. But the core game component of Survivor is that you're voting people off the island. And anytime you have multiple people trying to vote together in a secret ballot to get other people off the island, immediately, there's political strategy that just emerges naturally. It happened in the very first season, 25 years ago, and it's only gotten more complicated in the, in the ensuing decades. And at that point, you know, it's a game of planning, it's a game of strategy, it's a game of social politics. And so you're talking about, hey, what are the repercussions of this particular thing that I did. Yes, there's behavioral science, there's behavior in general that's mixed into that, but also it's planning. And something we do a lot in robotics is planning or an algorithm for planning. It's like knowing the row. If the robot's got to get to the front door, where does it have to move around to get to or even just wants to walk, how does it have to swing one leg so it lands there and then it lands there, lands the, it lands there. So that way it doesn't fall over on the way to the door. It's planning at many different levels. But the. But what we can. But in Survivor, the dynamics of physics, if you will, of the thing you're planning through, which are votes with people, is incredibly complicated. You're dealing with very simplified heuristics. Like, if I vote this way, that person will be mad. They will probably not want to go with me next time. But maybe it's more complicated than that. Maybe they will also be more afraid of everyone else next time. Right? You have to make these assessments. So I mean, you mentioned so many different angles of it. I mean, one of which is hypothesis testing and critical thinking. Because if people are mounting a plan at a vote as to who to vote out, they're clearly telling someone a lie, right? So how do you know if they're lying to you? And so that's clearly an element of critical thinking. One where your modes for hypothesis testing are limited. Like because the actual hypothesis test is seeing how they voted. And by then it's too late because it could have been you. So you have to come up with creative hypothesis tests. If what they're telling me is true, then this other thing should be true. So I can cross, I can cross reference across that. But also your time is limited. The sun is going down. You're going to travel. Council in. You know what, we don't have watches out there, but 10 minutes or so, right? You gotta make a call. So that is fascinating. And you could write, I mean, people have written theses about the strategy of Survivor and you know, you, It's a game. So naturally people are going to apply game theory to it. There's emergent cooperation. I've always wanted to apply agent based modeling. You know, people talk about coming up with control for, you know, robotic agents. I always wanted to do that with robotics. Haven't quite found the funding for that research project yet, but who knows? Maybe someday, maybe.

B

I mean, how did you feel? Because, you know, like, again, I made, you know, I try not to assume that everybody who kind of thinks in that like very, you know, I, I call it an academic way, but like somebody that's very like thinks very hard about the things that they're doing and like, you know, their brain takes all kinds of different paths. I mean, I know that's what I do. But like, do you feel like the way that your brain works and the way that you process interactions with people was helpful? To you on Survivor, or do you think that it was not as helpful for you?

A

I, I thought it was very helpful. I mean, like, I mean, one thing that, I mean, you talked about all the wonderful people in the, in, in the Robot Wars Robot Combat league. Right. It's a collaborative business, robotics. Right. You have to work with people a lot. I mean, people might assume that you're kind of just, you know, a lone weirdo in a basement making a robot. While that is sometimes the case, I won't say it never happens. It is not the typical path. Like, the person who's the expert in electronics is often not the same expert who's doing the mechanics, not the same XDM expert who might be doing the control algorithms, who might be doing any number of things that you would do on a robotics team or a robotics research group. And so keeping a team together is, is very much important in the actual construction and research of robotics as a field. I mean, and we experience this in any workplace right now. If you're able to get along with people, you're probably going to get more done. And I think that that's so like, having a collaborative team spirit is a good thing to have. Both of the fact that you are on a tribe and Survivor, you're trying to work together, but also you're trying to form a coalition of people to vote with you. Right. And being able to see people from other people's perspective. I mean, in, in the robotics business, we would call this state estimation. Like, hey, what's that person? You know, what's that robot state? Is it upside down? Is it right side up? Is that person angry or sad or happy? You know, there are, there's highly analogous. The tools are, are not exactly the same for those two processes, but I mean, if you, so long as you have an open mind for creative applications of things that, you know, you can do well on a show like Survivor. People of all stripes have done well on the show and applying what they know in their life to Survivor and being an academic roboticist, strangely not that different.

B

Well, that's good to hear. I mean, you. Because you kind of talked about a little bit just now, but do you think that there is a set type of person that is more likely to do well at a game like this? Or do you think it just all comes down to the luck of, like the makeup of the people on that show and just, you know, you happen to be the person that makes it because of X, Y and Z? You know, how much of it is like there is a Good strategy to use or how much of it is just, just the luck of the draw.

A

Well, there's, there's luck involved, without a doubt. I mean I, I don't know many Survivor players that would claim otherwise in terms of what works out. I mean it's not, you know, there are many ways to win the show, like so, and there are exceptions to many. Like there are very few hard and fast rules of the show. There's certain things that are good ideas. If someone approaches you, say, hey, let's be an alliance together, your instinct should just be to say yes. You know, like even if you don't, not fully sure about it, just say yes because you say anything else, you made an enemy, right? So like there are rules for what are smart things to do, but there are people who have broken those rules and won. Such is the nature of a game with so many agents involved. And you know, we, in robotics we call this a multi agent system, you know, like, and they are so, and while there are things that are good ideas to do, the games can be so wacky that someone with an unconventional approach can do very well. And, and, and, and someone who could be, and it's, and the mix of people that you're with is so important. You might be set up extremely well if you get plopped on a tribe with a certain type of people, with certain mix of people, but do horribly of putting it with a completely different mix of people. So there are a lot of factors and I think you have to, and I, and you have to acknowledge to yourself, yes, you can't control all these factors, but you can do the best you can. You know, that's, that's an act, that's an approach to robotics. It's like, hey, if I have a robot, it's currently in a situation, we've given it a task, it wants to, you know, wants to go, you know, flip the pancake, go pick up the door. It's not, we have no metaphysical uncertainty that it will succeed though in those, in that task, but it can make do the best possible job it can based upon what it knows. So I think that's a valuable approach to the game, at least one I find fulfilling, you know?

B

Yeah, yeah, for sure. Now one thing that I love that you talked about is going on Survivor, that it was a great opportunity to educate people that don't work in STEM fields about robotics and engineering. And that's something that I'm very passionate about because, I mean, I obviously interact with a lot of folks that are doing, you know, robot like things. But one of my favorite things to do is go to like a comic con and do a panel talking about something STEM and robotics and talking to people that don't know about these things and getting them interested, you know, getting a controller in someone's hand that's never driven a robot before and letting them have that experience. So talk about like the importance of that and why you enjoy getting to educate people who aren't already familiar with this type of thing.

A

Yeah, I mean, well, there's so many angles to how being a STEM enthusiast or even, or stem, like a professional can be helpful in your life. Yes. Having a clear minded view of analytical situations I think is very handy, you know, to take emotion out of it, even just for a moment to make do the analysis, but bring it back in when you're talking to people about it. I think that's, that's, that's a good skill to have. There are the technical skills like, like I made fire with glasses on my second season of the show, which I did not plan to do, but I was kind of like, it's sunny, we need fire. Is anyone nearsighted and like that? Then it just works out. So you see the practical utility of it and the sort of improvisational skills you get when you just have a general, a general scientific literacy about you. But I think there is just something powerful to that kind of view of life, of realizing that yes, you can enjoy life as it comes at you from a purely, like, from a purely emotional and aesthetic and humanist perspective. All that is incredibly true and valid in my own life. But also being able to turn on the analytical aspects like, okay, what's happening here? If in this situation, like how do I analyze the situation and say maybe I'm in a bad spot with these people here, what do I do? What are my options? And engineer a solution. Problem solving, if you will, kind of like engineering and then formulate that solution like, okay, well how can I execute that now given the social dynamics situation, how could that be executed with that? And, and, and really interesting solutions can come out of it. You know, it might, you might come across simple that you have to go to a tribal council and you vote and the most votes on someone goes home. But when you actually look at the, when you actually break it down, all your options, there are different ways you can split up the votes. So even if you don't have a majority, you can come up with a plurality vote where you split up the votes, you know, so in different ways, by telling people different things, interesting solutions emerge. And so. And I think that's just so much fun. And if you embrace the game for what it is and your own passions for what they are, you could have just such a diabolically fun time. That sounds bad. A beautifully fun time. It's so much fun.

B

Well, I truly, though, I find that typically in my experience in these social games, people who come into it being their authentic selves and, like, demonstrating that to people tends to net more trust than when you're not. And so I think that that's a beautiful thing, like, a beautiful way to be anyways.

A

I would agree. I totally agree with you, Christine. I mean, like, like, that's. That was an early lesson that I learned even. Just even before I even got on the show. So, like, I had applied for Survivor a number of years during graduate school when I was getting my PhD, and I'm like, I. I never heard back. And I figured, you know, they're just not interested in. In a weirdo like me on the show. But then just a few years later, I applied again and I got a little bit better about how I presented myself and what I was about and got a call the next day from. From this. From the show. They were interested, and I was kind of shocked. And like, they've made a horrible mistake. They're going to realize what. Like, like, they're not. They're. I'm counting to the. The days for when they realize that this is a very bad idea to try to put me on the show. Like, I'm not an actor, you know, Like, I, like, I'm not a TV person. And I kept going through the process and they kept, like. Kept like, Christian, we keep moving forward. It's like, when are they going to realize? And then eventually I flew out to Los Angeles for the fine, like, what they call finals week, where basically they shove you into a hotel, you're not allowed to leave, and. And basically they drag you out for interviews throughout the entire week. And I had my. And this. And they told me, you're gonna have your first interview, and if we don't like you, we'll send you home. And I was like, okay, I'm gonna have a glorious one day in the hotel. And. And. But. But I'm do my best to try to get on the show in this interview. So I'm gonna try to. I tried to do the things that I thought would be what the what. Tell what what a TV people would want, which would be like, make sure you have very crisp but also no muttering Stuttering answers like a newscaster. Just, like, get it as cleanly as can, polish it as much as you can, and, and don't be, don't be weird. So I sat down for this interview and the first thing I did was start babbling about math. And I was like, you know, just sort of like just going off in some kind of weird direction. And they loved it because it was me and they knew I. And I just, I just let go of that whole idea is like, don't be anyone else, just be me. And that really, that resonated with people in the casting process, the producers for the show. And I can tell that it wasn't just a, like, oh, we're going to laugh at. This guy's going to babble about math on the island. We're going to make, we're going to, we're going to, we're going to make fun of him. I got a sense there was some genuine interest in my view of life and that they want to give that up. Fair hearing on the island. Yes. It could have absolutely flopped and that would have been part of the show, but I think they, but they gave it an honest hearing. Even talking with the host, Jeff Probst, it was really interesting how much he gravitated to at least what I was saying. I can't say I fully communicated every aspect of it perfectly to him. I'm not sure he'd be. He quite passed the quiz at the end of the interview. But when I got to the island, it was the same thing. Yes. Christian, what do you do? I was like, working robots. Working humanoid robots, Robots that walk around. It's like, oh, really? Tell us about that. So well, it's a lot of fun, you know, and, and, and that passion, that authenticity that I think that so many of us who love engineering and STEM share is a lot more infectious than we realize. And it's how, and I think we recognize that, certainly each other on our YouTube channels where we enthusiastically talk about it, but also a lot of non STEM people see it as well. And that, and the response to me has just. I've been nothing, felt nothing but grateful and so humbled and how much positive response I've got to putting that out in the world.

B

Yeah, I mean, I think that it's wonderful, you know, obviously. So now post Survivor, you know, what are you. What are you up to? What do you have going on in your world as far as robots go?

A

Yeah. So, like, in my day job, I'm a robotics professor. I am an associate professor of Mechanical engineering at Florida State University and Florida A and M University. I run my own laboratory and I teach classes in robotics. In fact, I put all my lectures up on YouTube starting this year so people can watch my machine learning classes and things like that. But like, but one thing I love is talking to the public about robotics. And so I, I put out occasional videos on my YouTube channel. And now it's summer. I'm doing my lot of my research projects. I got, we're working on a few, a few robot ideas that, that we've been developing for the past handful of years with my graduate students. And that's been fun. But also I enjoy putting material out to the public, explaining these, you know, robotics news to the public. I've done it on a couple of occasions. I, I'll go to, I'll go, I'll, I'll go to, you know, like the pop culture conventions and talk about this year in human robotics and I'll film the talk and I'll put it up on YouTube. So I enjoy getting people seeing the spark you see when people, when they get it. And you see that in teaching and your classes, you see with that, with your graduate students when you're running your lab and you see that in everyday folks who just happen to click on your YouTube channel. So I enjoy that immensely and I intend to keep doing it.

B

Yeah. And obviously, if people want to kind of follow what you're doing, YouTube sounds like a good place to do that. Are there any other places that people should check out?

A

Sure, sure. I've been very active on Instagram, so all the socials, so, so you can find me at Chewbacci. So I'm Christian Hyubicki. So see, Hubicky C H U B I C K. I kind of like Chewbacca's little brother is what I think about it, is you can find me on Instagram, on Blue sky, you can find me on, on YouTube. Tick tock, even occasionally on Twitch. I'll Twitch Scream. You know those. Yeah. So I did a couple lectures on Twitch. Sometimes I play a little bit of Blood on the Clock Tower, which is a fun social deduction game. A little Survivor that I enjoy playing as well. So that's where. That's where you can find me.

B

Yeah, that's, that's wonderful. Yeah, that's. Ironically, I also am a storyteller for Blood on the Clock Tower on Twitter.

A

Kidding me. Did you, did you know this about me? Have we not planned this? So. Yeah, no, I'm. A lot of us survivors love playing Blood on the Clock Tower. For those who don't know what Blood in the Clock Tower. I don't know if it's part of your usual content here, Christine, when you talk about Blood of the Clock Tower, um, it's. If you ever played among us or. Or werewolf or Mafia or like. Or various. It's like that. But imagine if the rules were immensely complicated, and that's what makes it so much fun. It's actually an extremely fun game. And honestly, it's. It's good. It's good prep for Survivor. I played it in between my two Survivor seasons and I mean, talking about being able to take a break, turn on your analytical brain and come back into a social situation, it's so much of that. Oh, my goodness, it is. It's an incredible game of deduction. I. That's for another podcast, Christine. We can go in for.

B

Yeah, that's a whole other one, but, yeah, that's. That's great. That's great. Well, obviously, for those who are watching, please check out all of Christian's social media, YouTube, all of that good stuff. I'm sure you'll find some interesting things, especially for my audience that maybe isn't familiar with Survivor and didn't know anything about this. So definitely check that out. Make sure that you, like, share, subscribe, all of those good things. Keep watching and we'll see everybody next time on the show. Sam.