Words change in meaning. "Robot" is an interesting case, since for much
of its life the word had referents only in fiction, and even then it
changed.
The first public use of the term was in Capek's (losing the diacritics
for the sake of newsreader-compatibility) 1920 play R.U.R. The term came
from a Czech word for compulsory labor, and I think it's related to the
German "Arbeit" (work). In the play, robots were artificial devices that
looked and talked like humans and had human-like intelligence. They were
what we'd call androids today.
The term soon expanded to include devices that looked more mechanical
than human. At first they had a generally human form, with a head, a
torso, two arms, and two legs. Before long "robots" that didn't look
like anything living. The term still implied general intelligence, the
ability to interact with the environment, and usually the ability to
communicate in human language. Alien robots were exempt from the last
requirement, of course.
Later on the term started applying to real-world devices, but the
definition changed sharply. A robot could have very limited
problem-solving and communication abilities. The main requirement was an
ability to move around on its own and handle unexpected irregularities
in its environment.
Today, even the ability to move around isn't required. One of
Merriam-Webster's definitions is "a device that automatically performs
complicated, often repetitive tasks (as in an industrial assembly
line)." A Roomba bears hardly any resemblance to Capek's robots.
The shift has been driven by technology. Making a Capek or Asimov robot
is far beyond current capabilities, if it can be done at all. Making a
device that can communicate over a network of similar devices, handle
huge amounts of data, and react in microseconds has proven easier than
was once expected.
A robot today is defined by what we can make.
--
Gary McGath
http://www.mcgath.com