Security Robot Market 2025: Global Size, Key Companies, Trends, Growth and Regional Forecasts …

Security Robot Market 2025: Global Size, Key Companies, Trends, Growth … Cobham, Kongsberg Gruppen, Qinetiq, iRobot Corporation, RoboTex, …
  • Industry Attractiveness – Porter’s Five Industry Forces Analysis

    – Bargaining Power of Suppliers

    – Bargaining Power of Consumers

    – Threat of New Entrants

    – Threat of Substitute Products or Services

    Security Robot Market by Top Manufacturers: – Lockheed Martin Corporation, Northrop Grumman Corporation, Thales SA, BAE Systems PLC, Elbit Systems Limited, Leonardo SPA, Aerovironment Inc., Knight Scope, DJI, SMP Robotics, Boston Dynamics, Cobham, Kongsberg Gruppen, Qinetiq, iRobot Corporation, RoboTex, Recon Robotics

    Geographical Regions: – US, Canada, Mexico, Rest of North America, Brazil, Argentina, Rest of South America, China, Japan, India, Rest of Asia-Pacific, UK, Germany, France, Rest of Europe, UAE, South Africa, Saudi Arabia

    Request Discount at: –

    Analysis and Key Opportunities of Security Robot Market Report: Extensive analysis of the Global market, by component, helps in understanding the components of the Market that are currently used along with the variants that would gain prominence in the future. Security Robot market report analyses the market potential for each geographical region based on the growth rate, macroeconomic parameters, consumer buying patterns, and market demand and supply scenarios.

    Some Major Point cover in this Security Robot report are: –

    What will the market growth rate, Overview and Analysis by Type of Security Robot Market in 2023?

    What are the key factors driving, Analysis by Applications and Countries Global Security Robot industry?

    What are Dynamics, This Overview Includes Analysis of Scope, and price analysis of top Manufacturers Profiles of Security Robot?

    Who are Opportunities, Risk and Driving Force of Security Robot Market? Knows Upstream Raw Materials Sourcing and Downstream Buyers

    Who are the opportunities and threats faced by the Manufacturers in Security Robot space? Business Overview by Type, Applications, Gross Margin and Market Share

    What are the market opportunities, market risk and market overview of the Security Robot Market?

    Price of Report: $ 4250 (Single User License)

    Table of Contents included in Security Robot Market Report –

    PART 01: Executive summary

    PART 02: Scope of the report

    PART 03: Research Methodology

    PART 04: Introduction

    PART 05: Market landscape

    PART 06: Market segmentation by end-user industry

    PART 07: Market segmentation by application

    PART 08: Geographical Segmentation

    PART 09: Decision framework

    PART 10: Drivers and challenges

    PART 11: Market trends

    PART 12: Vendor landscape

    PART 13: Key vendor analysis

    PART 14: Appendix

    List of abbreviations

    List of Exhibits

    Purchase Report at

    About Absolute Reports:

    Absolute Reports is an upscale platform to help key personnel in the business world in strategizing and taking visionary decisions based on facts and figures derived from in depth market research. We are one of the top report resellers in the market, dedicated towards bringing you an ingenious concoction of data parameters.

    Contact Info:

    Name: Ajay More

    Email: [email protected]

    Organization: Absolute Reports

    Phone: +14242530807/+44203239 8187

  • Related Posts:

    • No Related Posts

    Jigsaw’s new Chrome extension will ‘Tune’ out toxic YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, Disqus comments

    Still an experiment, Tune lets you determine how much toxicity appears in comments on YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, and Disqus. A “volume” …

    Jigsaw is an Alphabet incubator tasked with using technology to tackle global security challenges. Notable projects include protections against DDoS attacks and DNS manipulation. Its latest is a Chrome extension called Tune to filter out toxic online comments with machine learning.

    In 2017, Jigsaw and Google announced the Perspective API that news organization and online communities could implement to filter out harassment. Instead of manual curation, machine learning is used to review comments and score toxicity. Partners like The New York Times, The Economist, and The Guardian have all experimented with the API.

    Jigsaw is now bringing Perspective directly to users with a Chrome extension for Mac, Windows, Linux, and Chrome OS. Still an experiment, Tune lets you determine how much toxicity appears in comments on YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, and Disqus.

    A “volume” dial has a range of options from turning off all toxic comments to seeing everything: hide it all, keep it quiet, low, medium, loud, blaring, and show it all. Hidden comments feature a dot beside them that are color-coded to note the severity.

    Tune also features the ability to filter toxicity, or a mix that allows users to show/hide comments that are an attack on identity, insult, profanity, threat, or sexually explicit.

    Tune toxic comments removal
    Tune toxic comments removal

    Jigsaw notes that no personal data is stored, with comment text sent for scoring and then automatically deleted after ranking. Users do have to sign into their Google Account for initial access to the Perspective API.

    As an experiment, Tune “still misses some toxic comments and incorrectly hides some non-toxic comments.”

    We’re constantly working to improve the underlying technology, and users can easily give feedback right in the tool to help us improve our algorithms. Tune isn’t meant to be a solution for direct targets of harassment (for whom seeing direct threats can be vital for their safety), nor is Tune a solution for all toxicity. Rather, it’s an experiment to show people how machine learning technology can create new ways to empower people as they read discussions online.

    Check out 9to5Google on YouTube for more news:

    Related Posts:

    • No Related Posts

    Uber’s self-driving car unit was burning $20 million a month

    Uber thought it would have 75,000 autonomous vehicles on the roads this year and be operating driverless taxi services in 13 cities by 2022, …

    Uber thought it would have 75,000 autonomous vehicles on the roads this year and be operating driverless taxi services in 13 cities by 2022, according to court documents unsealed last week. To reach those ambitious goals, the ridesharing company, which hopes to go public later this year, was spending $20 million a month on developing self-driving technologies.

    The figures, dating back to 2016, paint a picture of a company desperate to meet over-ambitious autonomy targets and one that is willing to spend freely, even recklessly, to get there. As Uber prepares for its IPO later this year, the new details could prove an embarrassing reminder that the company is still trailing in its efforts to develop technology that founder Travis Kalanick called “existential” to Uber’s future.

    The report was written for Uber as part of last year’s patent and trade secret theft lawsuit with rival Waymo, which accused engineer Anthony Levandowski of taking technical secrets with him when he left Google to found self-driving truck startup Otto. Uber acquired Otto in 2016. Uber hired Walter Bratic, the author of the report, as an expert witness to question Waymo’s valuation of the economic damages it had suffered — a whopping $1.85 billion. Bratic’s report capped at $605,000 the cost to independently develop Waymo’s purported trade secrets.

    Waymo eventually settled for 0.34 percent of Uber’s equity, which could be worth around $300 million after an IPO if a recent $90 billion valuation of the company is accurate.

    Bratic’s report provides details of internal analyses and reports codenamed Project Rubicon that Uber carried out during 2016. A presentation in January that year projected that driverless cars could become profitable for Uber in 2018, while a May report said Uber might have 13,000 self-driving taxis by 2019. Just four months later, that estimate had jumped to 75,000 vehicles.

    The current head of Uber’s self-driving technologies, Eric Meyhofer, testified that Uber’s original estimates of having tens of thousands of AVs in a dozen cities by 2022 were “highly speculative” “assumptions and estimates.” Although Meyhofer declined to provide any other numbers, he did say, “They probably ran a lot of scenarios beyond 13 cities. Maybe they assumed two in another scenario, or one, or three hundred. It’s a set of knobs you turn to try to understand parameters that you need to try to meet.”

    One specific goal, set by John Bares, the engineer then in charge of Uber’s autonomous vehicles, was for Uber to be able to forgo human safety drivers by 2020. The company’s engineers seemed certain that acquiring Otto and Levandowski would supercharge its progress.

    “At one point, John Bares and [ex-Google engineer] Brian McClendon estimated that it would help accelerate [AV development] by 12 to 24 months,” testified one Uber corporate development manager.

    In a newly unsealed note from a January 2016 meeting with Levandowski, Bares thought that simply talking with Levandowski might be worth tens of millions of dollars: “He would bring (filtered) advice about what to try and not try…that is a day with him and our team could save us months towards 2020 (month = $20 million run rate).”

    If Uber had maintained a $20 million monthly run rate since beginning its AV program in early 2015, and allowing $200 million for its Otto purchase, TechCrunch has calculated that Uber could have spent more than $900 million on automated vehicle research. In contrast, Waymo spent $1.1 billion on its own self-driving cars from 2009 to the end of 2015, and could be spending as much as $1 billion a year today.

    But the honeymoon period for Otto and Uber was brief. In a deposition for the lawsuit, Bares said that his expectation that the Otto acquisition would advance Uber’s self-driving car efforts lasted for “a three- to four-week period, starting in early January 2016.” By August 2016, he testified, it was actually proving a setback: “We never got any lasers out of it. It had… a huge managerial disruption on our staff… as a result of Anthony’s effort to manage and lead.”

    The Bratic report details the number of people Uber had working on automated vehicles. It says the headcount of Uber’s hardware department in June 2017 was 155 people, with 405 people working on software. A separate Uber filing from two months earlier stated that it had more than twice as many people, 1,500, working in its AV unit,although this number may have included Uber’s test operation team and vehicle operators.

    The newly unsealed document also reveals that Waymo claimed Uber’s alleged misappropriation of its trade secrets had accelerated the commercialization of Uber’s autonomous technology by over three years and 10 months.

    “This would mean that, applying [Uber’s] assumption of commercialization in 13 cities by 2022, Uber should be ready to commercialize AV technology in 13 cities by 2018,” wrote Bratic. Clearly, this did not happen. In fact, Uber only recently resumed testing a handful of AVs on public roads, following a fatal crash in Tempe, Arizona, last March.

    Uber reported a net loss of $865 million in the last quarter of 2018, and has never made a profit.

    Related Posts:

    • No Related Posts

    Malcolm Gladwell: Self-driving vehicles could make traffic worse, pose cybersecurity risk

    Urmson’s firm, Aurora, raised more than $530 million from investors that included Amazon and Sequoia Capital last month. Asked about Aurora’s …

    Uber will not face criminal charges over self-driving car crash

    Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano on prosecutors in Arizona saying they didn’t find any evidence to charge Uber criminally in the self-driving car crash that killed a woman last year.

    The world’s most innovative companies are betting billions of dollars that self-driving vehicles will revolutionize the way humanity travels, but some critics, including best-selling author Malcolm Gladwell, warn the promising technology poses serious risks without proper oversight and regulation.

    Continue Reading Below

    Amazon, Google, Uber and Tesla are just a few of the firms that have invested in self-driving vehicles in recent years. Proponents, including CEO Chris Urmson of the Amazon-backed startup Aurora, argue that autonomous vehicles will dramatically reduce fatal car accidents, improve traffic flow and provide commuters with hours of free time that they would have otherwise spent driving.


    While Gladwell agrees that self-driving cars will help to prevent many of the roughly 40,000 deaths that occur in car accidents in the U.S. each year, he argues the threat of hackers targeting self-driving vehicles poses a new set of risks. Gladwell, who served as executive producer of the documentary “Autonomy,” argues that Silicon Valley has been “a little too blasé” about cybersecurity risks despite recent high-profile breaches affecting tech leaders such as Facebook — and even the National Security Agency.

    “If every car on the road is automated and someone hacks in and creates a 200-car pileup, that seems to be a reasonable thing to worry about,” Gladwell said during a panel discussion at the South By Southwest conference in Austin, Texas.

    While self-driving vehicles have yet to experience a major cybersecurity breach, several other incidents have raised questions about the technology. Uber temporarily suspended its self-driving vehicles tests after one of its prototypes fatally struck a pedestrian in Arizona. Tesla has implemented several updates to its “Autopilot” program – which handles basic driving tasks but still requires human oversight – to remind drivers to keep their hands on the wheel after it was linked to several accidents, including a fatal crash last year in Mountain View, California.


    Cybersecurity risks

    Urmson’s firm, Aurora, raised more than $530 million from investors that included Amazon and Sequoia Capital last month. Asked about Aurora’s approach to cybersecurity, he said the firm is still “early in the development of the technology.” While Urmson said self-driving technology could significantly reduce the 95 percent of accidents that occur due to human error, he admitted that threat of cybersecurity failure introduces a new set of concerns to the transportation sector.

    “Inevitably, we will introduce new failure modes,” Urmson said. “We will have accidents that now occur that would not have occurred because of human driving. As a society, we have to make that trade, in the same way when we went from riding horses to driving cars, we had a whole new set of injuries.”

    Gladwell, who sees a catastrophic accident involving a failure of self-driving technology as a virtual inevitability in the coming years, pointed to Edward Snowden’s breach of the NSA’s servers as proof that no system – not even one protected by the nation’s leading cybersecurity experts – is totally safe from a hack.

    “If the NSA can’t protect itself, who can? Aren’t they about as good and as motivated as anyone would be to have sufficient and impregnable cybersecurity defenses?” Gladwell said. “It’s not that there’s insufficient effort being devoted toward cybersecurity. Maybe there is something fundamentally about many of these connected systems that makes them indefensible.”

    Traffic trouble

    Urmson and other innovators in the space envision a future where roadways are safer, less congested and self-driving cars have all but eliminated the human responsibility to find parking. Rather than having to focus on the road or sitting in hours of Los Angeles traffic, a commuter could check their email or watch a movie.

    He expects self-driving technology to enter the market through mobility services, rather than people purchasing their own autonomous cars.

    “It would be dramatically easier [to bring self-driving vehicles to market] if we could snap our fingers and say, ‘no more cars on the road,’” Urmson said. “But I don’t think that’s real.”

    But Gladwell isn’t convinced that self-driving technology will finally solve the traffic congestion that has long plagued major cities like New York and Los Angeles. As an example, he suggests that an influx of self-driving vehicles alongside existing traditional cars would clog streets even further.

    For example, passengers in autonomous vehicles could simply step out of the vehicles and send them to look for parking on crowded city streets indefinitely, exacerbating the problem. Gladwell placed the onus on politicians to set up regulations that will address these problems before they can occur.

    “Traffic is the great limiting factor in urban America – we waste way too much time getting to places and sitting in congested streets,” Gladwell said. “If it’s not done right, this technology makes congestion worse.”

    Self-driving tech is coming

    Even with looming security concerns, self-driving technology is moving toward the market at a breakneck pace. Aurora’s most recent investment round valued the company at more than $2 billion, though its vehicles have yet to hit the market.

    Tesla CEO Elon Musk said earlier this year that he expects his company to achieve fully autonomous driving by the end of 2019, meaning that its vehicles will be able to conduct trips from pickup to parking without human oversight. Once achieved, the technology would still need regulatory approval before it can operate on the streets.


    Urmson said Aurora is still working to perfect its vehicles, conducting tests in multiple markets to shore up artificial intelligence in the wake of the deadly Uber accident.

    “The promise of this technology is this ability to have vehicles that are safer than human drivers. … we’re not there yet,” Urmson said.

    Related Posts:

    • No Related Posts

    Alphabet’s AI-powered Chrome extension hides toxic comments

    … known as “zen mode”) or show selective types of posts containing attacks, insults, or profanity. Tune also works with Reddit, YouTube and Disqus.

    Jigsaw admits that Tune is still an experiment, meaning it may not spot all forms of toxicity or could hide non-offensive comments. “We’re constantly working to improve the underlying technology, and users can easily give feedback right in the tool to help us improve our algorithms,” C.J. Adams, Jigsaw product manager, wrote in a blog post.

    Though it doesn’t work across the entirety of the web, the sites it does support are all grappling with various forms of toxicity. Twitter has its alt-right meddlers and Nazis; Facebook has struggled with anti-vaxxers of late (not to mention foreign interference during elections); YouTube has been forced to lock down comments on videos of young kids due to pedophilic comments; and Reddit has banned subreddits prone to spreading conspiracy theories.

    Notably, a recent Recodearticle about Twitter’s focus on improving the health of its service noted it was already tapping Google’s Perspective AI to help track toxicity. Google has also implemented Perspective on YouTube, according to CNET, giving channel owners the option to block comments identified as abusive by the algorithm.

    At the same time, frequent abusers have created their own systems to help bypass moderators altogether. Notorious social media site Gab — known as “Twitter for the alt-right” — recently released its own extension that puts an alternative comments section on any website.

    Related Posts:

    • No Related Posts