Not good but better than wading through leech-infested mud in south-east Asia, which was my other option.
Having been both a squid and a robotics researcher in a previous century, this has issues. Shipboard fires truly are environments where no human wants to be, as anyone could easily believe. Somewhat fewer people know all of the factors involved: Navy ships are not stable platforms in anything but dead-calm water, which rarely occurs. Next, passageways are designed with 'walking through them' as an afterthought. You have to step over and duck under something every few feet belowdecks. While the ship is bucking and rolling, remember.
Navy ships can be quite large and can have large interior structures that you need to go the long way around. Unless you pre-position an entire horde of walking robots all through the ship, they won't have time to get to the fire.
As a way to send some money so a robotics program can build something physical it is admirable. It is not the future of shipboard firefighting.
It is good to see multiple posts challenging the idea of 'legitimate' news and to see the positive recognition of them. One aspect I've not seen mentioned is the idea of a 'terrorism expert'. Exactly how does anyone actually rate being considered a terrorism expert?
When someone can make accurate and specific predictions or, even better, identify high-leverage actions to change terrorist behavior, they would rate being considered experts. Otherwise, they are no better than 'futurists'.
Love makes the world go 'round, with a little help from intrinsic angular momentum.