underline960@sh.itjust.works
on 11 Sep 23:41
nextcollapse
Can it hurry up and ruin the AI hype, too?
Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
on 11 Sep 23:48
nextcollapse
But in the short to medium term, there are much more reliable, efficient, and cost-effective platforms that can take over in these situations: robots with arms, but with wheels instead of legs.
I never understood why the first generation of robots can’t just be on wheels. Even if it needs to go up and down stairs often, it’s still easier to have legs just for stairs and resort to wheels all other times.
The article also thinks battery life is an issue. IMO too many things have batteries, why can’t it just rely on a power cord. Sure that won’t work in some situations, but damn it it can fold my laundry.
Usernameblankface@lemmy.world
on 12 Sep 01:37
nextcollapse
Yes, more specialized robots for now. When it’s harder to build for a human to do the job, build for a robot to do the job.
At some point in the future, it makes sense to combine the features of different types of robots into one form that can step in to human jobs
I mean, we’re hundreds if not thousands of iterations into robotics. Hell, we’ve probably had tens if not hundreds of attempts to create humanoid robots.
This is just the current iteration of humanoid robots getting beaten up for not delivering on its promises.
Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
on 12 Sep 00:24
nextcollapse
Anyone who's a fan of mecha anime or games already knew this. The human body is a comedy of errors masquerading as a marvel of bioengineering. We're just fish who forgot how to swim and learned how about economics.
Archangel1313@lemmy.ca
on 12 Sep 00:38
nextcollapse
It is always cheaper to use human labor, where a humanoid form is best suited to do it. Automation is best implemented in situations where the human form doesn’t work best.
AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
on 12 Sep 04:11
collapse
Yeah, no…“always”. Technology like humanoid robots, is never going to get cheap enough to replace low-paid manual labor. That’s a marketing lie that tech CEO’s like to use, in order to drum up more investment capital.
Considering that humanoid labor often works in tandem with actual automation…the idea of robots using machines to accomplish tasks that a human could just as easily do, with far less overhead…makes no sense.
The only way automation is effective, is when it exceeds the limitations of what the human body can accomplish. Designing it with the same basic limitations doesn’t improve on anything.
AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
on 12 Sep 04:33
nextcollapse
It’s kinda dumb to make predictions about limitations on future technologies. If history is any indicator, predictions of ‘impossibilities’ almost always turn out mistaken.
That’s not to mention that manual labour should not be low cost. But that’s an entirely different discussion.
No, man. History is the indicator here. They’ve been talking about automation replacing people for so long now, that the idea has become more myth than fact. In certain cases, for certain jobs, it works…but it costs enormous amounts of money. In almost every practical instance, that cost is prohibitive.
Most places will weigh their options, and simply decide to keep hiring people for those jobs, since they don’t have to rely on either a massive influx of investment, or take on the burden of securing enormous loans. In almost every way, it is cheaper to hire people to do the work that people are good at.
Did you know that elevator operator used to be a job that people had to be employed to do? No one says hiring a person to operate an elevator is more cost effective than installing a push button system for people to do it themselves. The cost really wasn’t prohibitive to move away from human labor here.
This is not the only case, I’m just bringing up an example. The thing is, when a job is replaced by technology, you don’t even think about it anymore. Yes, there are also jobs that CAN be replaced by technology, where the tech is more expensive… but that’s not the rule, that’s just the leading edge.
Archangel1313@lemmy.ca
on 12 Sep 06:45
nextcollapse
Did they replace the elevator operator with a robot that looked just like an elevator operator? And did they make that robot stand inside the elevator, and pull the lever, just like the old elevator operator would?
No. Of course not.
Because that would be insane. Replacing a person with a robot that does the exact same thing that a human can do, is pointless. It doesn’t improve anything. It doesn’t save you money. It isn’t more efficient. It’s just a very expensive gimmick.
But did the elevator operator get replaced by a humanoid robot pulling the lever of a formerly human-operated elevator?
That’s what they person before you was referencing. In most situations a simple computer-controlled mechanism is enough. If that’s not enough, a non-humanoid robot trumps a humanoid robot. And in situations where a humanoid shape is really necessary, human labour is really cheap.
Humans don’t have their shape because it’s the perfectly ideal form, but because evolution always only iterates on what it has.
Btw: automatisation happens because either using a full human for a simple task is overkill (e.g. your elevator operator example) or because humans really aren’t the optimal shape (e.g. using a robot arm to lift a car during production). If a humanoid shape is required, humans will do the job.
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
on 12 Sep 09:07
nextcollapse
Yeah, no…“always”. Technology like humanoid robots, is never going to get cheap enough to replace low-paid manual labor.
That’s definitely not a rule. Just because so far we managed to keep manual labor dirt cheap doesn’t mean it always have to be like that. Tariffs, migration policy, social programs and so on, all affect the cost of labor. Move all the production back to developed countries while limiting immigration and the costs of labor might increase to the point where humanoid robots make sense.
I’m not saying that this will happen, only that we definitely can’t say it won’t.
The only thing that makes manual labor worth more, is demand. And adding more competition to the market does the opposite of that. If anything, robots will make human labor even cheaper. And that will only get worse, the cheaper the robots get.
Same goes for every other factor you listed. All of those things add cost to a business’s bottom line. Where they will inevitably try to claw back some of those losses, are labor costs. “Sorry, but due to overhead constraints, this is the best I can offer you. Take it or leave it”. And in an economy that’s under pressure, people will take whatever they can get.
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
on 12 Sep 18:51
collapse
The only thing that makes manual labor worth more, is demand.
The overhead on the robot is mostly maintenance, which is a humanoid skill. If the robots can maintain each other, or build each other, someone just won capitalism
Over time, maintenance costs on machines tend to increase. They all have a practical limit on profitability, before that cost exceeds their contributive value. Then they need to be replaced.
That’s pure science fiction. It will never happen. Training people to do various manual tasks is always cheaper than using robots. Automation involves dedicated, task-specific machinery that improves on existing (manual) methods. People are always there to fill in the gaps in what those machines are capable of. We provide that required versatility.
Replacing people with people-shaped robots to do the exact same job that people do, is the opposite of efficiency. There is no improvement involved. It’s literally a lateral shift, with an enormous price tag attached to it.
I don’t know what to tell you, other than it’s already happening. Once the first robot builds a second, it’s over. You can buy one that can physically do light tasks for $8k, this summer Amazon started using robots for deliveries and has been using them for packaging for longer
It’s not science fiction, it’s now an engineering problem, one that is progressing quickly
Lol! Dude. It isn’t “already happening”. Where are you hearing that?
And are we still talking about humanoid robots, or are you talking about drones and automated roller carts? Because they do have those, but there’s no way they are able to repair each other or build more of themselves. What they do have, is as I said, very task-specific and non-intuitive. If even one variable is out of place, the whole system goes off the rails, and an actual human being is required to put things right again.
No, I’m talking about automonous humanoid robots specifically. The rollers and shelf bots have been around for years
NVidia also just released a big suite of tools to train AI for robotics, it’s basically a huge physics sandbox where you can train and test models at scale before real world testing
Boston dynamics and others are currently writing/lobbying regulations for bipedal robots so that they can meet safety requirements - current safety standards require an emergency shutoff switch, but bipedal robots fall over if they don’t balance, which isn’t particularly safe
This is happening, and quickly. None of them have the dexterity to machine parts, but the range of tasks they can do is rapidly expanding
Lol! This isn’t “happening, and quickly”. Boston Dynamics has been working on their humanoid robots for decades, and they’re basically at the same stage they were at the beginning.
It’s just a gimmick, my friend. Not a viable alternative to human labor. They don’t perform tasks “better” or “more efficiently” than people. It isn’t even a matter of them improving over time. You simply don’t invest in new technologies that promise to do the exact same thing as the old ones.
Lmao… That’s a wild take. Boston dynamics has been steadily improving this whole time, they were the first to really crack bipedal locamotion. Not just walking, running and flipping. Carrying loads. Kipping back up to their feet
You can, right now, for $8k buy a humanoid robot that can run, and be controlled to do whatever else. That’s insane
And you can get shelf stacking humanoid robots that work commercially. These exist and are for sale
Amazon is currently field testing humanoid robots that deliver packages from the truck to the door.
Lol! Are you talking about this? Dude, this is what I meant when I called them a gimmick. And if I recall correctly, the “shelf stacking humanoid robots that work commercially”, are not actually"working commercially". In fact, they didn’t work at all when given actual things to lift and stack. They could only carry empty boxes, and dropped them more often than not, and tended to fall over all the time.
Like I said, even if they improve to the point where they don’t fuck everything up…all they will be able to do, is the same thing people already do. Except people can also do all kinds of different things, without requiring an engineer to be onsite to set them up for the new task.
No… I’ve never seen those before. That’s not what I’m talking about at all, I also think the Tesla robots piloted by humans are probably going nowhere, for the record
Want to run failed startups past me some more? I gave you examples of humanoid robots being tested in real world conditions
Ummm, except you didn’t give me examples. Can you post a link to these robots that are actually being tested in real world conditions?
Or even a link to the $8k robots that are not the same as the one I found for $6k? I have a hard time believing that another $2k is going to somehow provide the difference between that thing, and something functional.
Lol! The Agility Robotics model used by Amazon costs $250k per unit. And is currently only capable of moving empty totes around in a controlled environment.
And the Pudu model you linked, is listed on their website for $214k.
Buddy, it’s right there on the page I linked. Even your article says they’re hoping to get the price down to under $30k, at some point. That’s why I looked up their website directly, to see how much they’re currently selling them for. It’s $214k. I don’t know what else to tell you.
I see one for $43k on there, I don’t see any for $200k on that site
But that’s kinda irrelevant, as is how much Amazon’s robots cost. The point is how quickly robotics is advancing
There’s so many companies making these that I can’t find the one I saw weeks ago. They’re being tested in real world conditions. There’s a million groups playing with these things, trying to get them to do more and more tasks
And think of what full automation would look like… It would be a bunch of factory equipment like it is now. The automatons just need to carry and place stuff between stations, maybe slot things together and screw them in. That’s not that high a bar
I just don’t see the line where any of that is impossible. It seems inevitable if society doesn’t collapse this decade
Mniot@programming.dev
on 13 Sep 15:29
nextcollapse
The disconnect is coming here:
I just don’t see the line where any of that is impossible. It seems inevitable
I agree with you that robots building robots is not impossible. I disagree with you that it’s therefore inevitable. I strongly disagree with you that it’s therefore inevitable in the immediate future.
I don’t think you’re arguing in good faith,at this point. You send me an article about a specific humanoid robot, claiming it costs $8k. That article clearly states the make and model, as well as provides pictures of the unit in question. It is the Pudu D9 humanoid robot.
So, I sent you the website where it is being sold, which clearly states a price, that doesn’t match your claim…and now all of a sudden, you don’t even know what robot you were talking about before?
SugarCatDestroyer@lemmy.world
on 12 Sep 15:31
nextcollapse
Great, we have few resources, but they are used to create expensive robots, we really won’t live to see 2100.
mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
on 12 Sep 22:31
collapse
yep. and if we have fewer resources, why not squander them by trying to cram all the electronics, batteries, motors and other shit into an upright biped frame. because wheels was a fad and centering the mass close to the ground just makes too much sense.
SugarCatDestroyer@lemmy.world
on 13 Sep 09:00
collapse
I believe that humanity simply needs to go through a reset, this is already madness of the highest degree.
mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
on 13 Sep 10:30
collapse
Unfortunately for the reset argument, I’m really attached to:
power
clean water
sewage
communications
hospitals
i’m an old man. I’ve seen, smelled! places where it all collapsed, and it always takes longer to rebuild than it does to just not destroy it all in the first place.
reset politics. leave the infrastructure please.
SugarCatDestroyer@lemmy.world
on 13 Sep 12:12
collapse
Reality unfortunately can be merciless, I myself am already preparing myself for the fact that I will be one of the first in line to die and I don’t care anymore.
I wanted to live in a civilization but not as a slave where even my thoughts are listened to while the world rots before my eyes. And where they can take everything away from me, even my soul, at any moment because someone in power wants it that way.
threaded - newest
Can it hurry up and ruin the AI hype, too?
I never understood why the first generation of robots can’t just be on wheels. Even if it needs to go up and down stairs often, it’s still easier to have legs just for stairs and resort to wheels all other times.
The article also thinks battery life is an issue. IMO too many things have batteries, why can’t it just rely on a power cord. Sure that won’t work in some situations, but damn it it can fold my laundry.
Yes, more specialized robots for now. When it’s harder to build for a human to do the job, build for a robot to do the job.
At some point in the future, it makes sense to combine the features of different types of robots into one form that can step in to human jobs
Think of it like grandma. She can fold your underwear for you but needs to go sit down every half hour
<img alt="" src="https://cdn2.steamgriddb.com/grid/58bc4cc13d853a29d33193e1f786ff16.png">
I do t understand why we can’t genetically engineer animals to have wheels. Give me a fucking cheetah with wheels instead of legs please.
I mean, we’re hundreds if not thousands of iterations into robotics. Hell, we’ve probably had tens if not hundreds of attempts to create humanoid robots.
This is just the current iteration of humanoid robots getting beaten up for not delivering on its promises.
Anyone who's a fan of mecha anime or games already knew this. The human body is a comedy of errors masquerading as a marvel of bioengineering. We're just fish who forgot how to swim and learned how about economics.
It is always cheaper to use human labor, where a humanoid form is best suited to do it. Automation is best implemented in situations where the human form doesn’t work best.
Currently
Yeah, no…“always”. Technology like humanoid robots, is never going to get cheap enough to replace low-paid manual labor. That’s a marketing lie that tech CEO’s like to use, in order to drum up more investment capital.
Considering that humanoid labor often works in tandem with actual automation…the idea of robots using machines to accomplish tasks that a human could just as easily do, with far less overhead…makes no sense.
The only way automation is effective, is when it exceeds the limitations of what the human body can accomplish. Designing it with the same basic limitations doesn’t improve on anything.
It’s kinda dumb to make predictions about limitations on future technologies. If history is any indicator, predictions of ‘impossibilities’ almost always turn out mistaken.
That’s not to mention that manual labour should not be low cost. But that’s an entirely different discussion.
No, man. History is the indicator here. They’ve been talking about automation replacing people for so long now, that the idea has become more myth than fact. In certain cases, for certain jobs, it works…but it costs enormous amounts of money. In almost every practical instance, that cost is prohibitive.
Most places will weigh their options, and simply decide to keep hiring people for those jobs, since they don’t have to rely on either a massive influx of investment, or take on the burden of securing enormous loans. In almost every way, it is cheaper to hire people to do the work that people are good at.
Did you know that elevator operator used to be a job that people had to be employed to do? No one says hiring a person to operate an elevator is more cost effective than installing a push button system for people to do it themselves. The cost really wasn’t prohibitive to move away from human labor here.
This is not the only case, I’m just bringing up an example. The thing is, when a job is replaced by technology, you don’t even think about it anymore. Yes, there are also jobs that CAN be replaced by technology, where the tech is more expensive… but that’s not the rule, that’s just the leading edge.
Did they replace the elevator operator with a robot that looked just like an elevator operator? And did they make that robot stand inside the elevator, and pull the lever, just like the old elevator operator would?
No. Of course not.
Because that would be insane. Replacing a person with a robot that does the exact same thing that a human can do, is pointless. It doesn’t improve anything. It doesn’t save you money. It isn’t more efficient. It’s just a very expensive gimmick.
But did the elevator operator get replaced by a humanoid robot pulling the lever of a formerly human-operated elevator?
That’s what they person before you was referencing. In most situations a simple computer-controlled mechanism is enough. If that’s not enough, a non-humanoid robot trumps a humanoid robot. And in situations where a humanoid shape is really necessary, human labour is really cheap.
Humans don’t have their shape because it’s the perfectly ideal form, but because evolution always only iterates on what it has.
Btw: automatisation happens because either using a full human for a simple task is overkill (e.g. your elevator operator example) or because humans really aren’t the optimal shape (e.g. using a robot arm to lift a car during production). If a humanoid shape is required, humans will do the job.
That’s definitely not a rule. Just because so far we managed to keep manual labor dirt cheap doesn’t mean it always have to be like that. Tariffs, migration policy, social programs and so on, all affect the cost of labor. Move all the production back to developed countries while limiting immigration and the costs of labor might increase to the point where humanoid robots make sense.
I’m not saying that this will happen, only that we definitely can’t say it won’t.
The only thing that makes manual labor worth more, is demand. And adding more competition to the market does the opposite of that. If anything, robots will make human labor even cheaper. And that will only get worse, the cheaper the robots get.
Same goes for every other factor you listed. All of those things add cost to a business’s bottom line. Where they will inevitably try to claw back some of those losses, are labor costs. “Sorry, but due to overhead constraints, this is the best I can offer you. Take it or leave it”. And in an economy that’s under pressure, people will take whatever they can get.
Ever heard about supply?
Labor is the supply. Demand determines its value.
I didn’t know we were in the presence of a psychic with a crystal ball!
My mistake, you’re right about everything!
The overhead on the robot is mostly maintenance, which is a humanoid skill. If the robots can maintain each other, or build each other, someone just won capitalism
Over time, maintenance costs on machines tend to increase. They all have a practical limit on profitability, before that cost exceeds their contributive value. Then they need to be replaced.
And if the machines are the ones building new parts, that, like many other things, goes out the window. They can even recycle and refurbish parts
That’s pure science fiction. It will never happen. Training people to do various manual tasks is always cheaper than using robots. Automation involves dedicated, task-specific machinery that improves on existing (manual) methods. People are always there to fill in the gaps in what those machines are capable of. We provide that required versatility.
Replacing people with people-shaped robots to do the exact same job that people do, is the opposite of efficiency. There is no improvement involved. It’s literally a lateral shift, with an enormous price tag attached to it.
I don’t know what to tell you, other than it’s already happening. Once the first robot builds a second, it’s over. You can buy one that can physically do light tasks for $8k, this summer Amazon started using robots for deliveries and has been using them for packaging for longer
It’s not science fiction, it’s now an engineering problem, one that is progressing quickly
Lol! Dude. It isn’t “already happening”. Where are you hearing that?
And are we still talking about humanoid robots, or are you talking about drones and automated roller carts? Because they do have those, but there’s no way they are able to repair each other or build more of themselves. What they do have, is as I said, very task-specific and non-intuitive. If even one variable is out of place, the whole system goes off the rails, and an actual human being is required to put things right again.
No, I’m talking about automonous humanoid robots specifically. The rollers and shelf bots have been around for years
NVidia also just released a big suite of tools to train AI for robotics, it’s basically a huge physics sandbox where you can train and test models at scale before real world testing
Boston dynamics and others are currently writing/lobbying regulations for bipedal robots so that they can meet safety requirements - current safety standards require an emergency shutoff switch, but bipedal robots fall over if they don’t balance, which isn’t particularly safe
This is happening, and quickly. None of them have the dexterity to machine parts, but the range of tasks they can do is rapidly expanding
Lol! This isn’t “happening, and quickly”. Boston Dynamics has been working on their humanoid robots for decades, and they’re basically at the same stage they were at the beginning.
It’s just a gimmick, my friend. Not a viable alternative to human labor. They don’t perform tasks “better” or “more efficiently” than people. It isn’t even a matter of them improving over time. You simply don’t invest in new technologies that promise to do the exact same thing as the old ones.
Lmao… That’s a wild take. Boston dynamics has been steadily improving this whole time, they were the first to really crack bipedal locamotion. Not just walking, running and flipping. Carrying loads. Kipping back up to their feet
You can, right now, for $8k buy a humanoid robot that can run, and be controlled to do whatever else. That’s insane
And you can get shelf stacking humanoid robots that work commercially. These exist and are for sale
Amazon is currently field testing humanoid robots that deliver packages from the truck to the door.
Your knowledge is very dated, friend.
Lol! Are you talking about this? Dude, this is what I meant when I called them a gimmick. And if I recall correctly, the “shelf stacking humanoid robots that work commercially”, are not actually"working commercially". In fact, they didn’t work at all when given actual things to lift and stack. They could only carry empty boxes, and dropped them more often than not, and tended to fall over all the time.
Like I said, even if they improve to the point where they don’t fuck everything up…all they will be able to do, is the same thing people already do. Except people can also do all kinds of different things, without requiring an engineer to be onsite to set them up for the new task.
No… I’ve never seen those before. That’s not what I’m talking about at all, I also think the Tesla robots piloted by humans are probably going nowhere, for the record
Want to run failed startups past me some more? I gave you examples of humanoid robots being tested in real world conditions
Ummm, except you didn’t give me examples. Can you post a link to these robots that are actually being tested in real world conditions?
Or even a link to the $8k robots that are not the same as the one I found for $6k? I have a hard time believing that another $2k is going to somehow provide the difference between that thing, and something functional.
Yeah ok
Amazon delivery robots
$8k robot
Lol! The Agility Robotics model used by Amazon costs $250k per unit. And is currently only capable of moving empty totes around in a controlled environment.
And the Pudu model you linked, is listed on their website for $214k.
I know I half assed those links, but your numbers are an order of magnitude off lmao
Were you not able to open the link to their website? You can buy one today for $214k. It’s the D9 model from your article.
Did you not convert from yuan or something lol?
Buddy, it’s right there on the page I linked. Even your article says they’re hoping to get the price down to under $30k, at some point. That’s why I looked up their website directly, to see how much they’re currently selling them for. It’s $214k. I don’t know what else to tell you.
I see one for $43k on there, I don’t see any for $200k on that site
But that’s kinda irrelevant, as is how much Amazon’s robots cost. The point is how quickly robotics is advancing
There’s so many companies making these that I can’t find the one I saw weeks ago. They’re being tested in real world conditions. There’s a million groups playing with these things, trying to get them to do more and more tasks
And think of what full automation would look like… It would be a bunch of factory equipment like it is now. The automatons just need to carry and place stuff between stations, maybe slot things together and screw them in. That’s not that high a bar
I just don’t see the line where any of that is impossible. It seems inevitable if society doesn’t collapse this decade
The disconnect is coming here:
I agree with you that robots building robots is not impossible. I disagree with you that it’s therefore inevitable. I strongly disagree with you that it’s therefore inevitable in the immediate future.
I don’t think you’re arguing in good faith,at this point. You send me an article about a specific humanoid robot, claiming it costs $8k. That article clearly states the make and model, as well as provides pictures of the unit in question. It is the Pudu D9 humanoid robot.
So, I sent you the website where it is being sold, which clearly states a price, that doesn’t match your claim…and now all of a sudden, you don’t even know what robot you were talking about before?
Give me a break, man.
.
<img alt="" src="https://feddit.org/pictrs/image/b26c1d29-d1b8-4d41-aa7b-99a77ec76b58.gif">
Great, we have few resources, but they are used to create expensive robots, we really won’t live to see 2100.
yep. and if we have fewer resources, why not squander them by trying to cram all the electronics, batteries, motors and other shit into an upright biped frame. because wheels was a fad and centering the mass close to the ground just makes too much sense.
I believe that humanity simply needs to go through a reset, this is already madness of the highest degree.
Unfortunately for the reset argument, I’m really attached to:
i’m an old man. I’ve seen, smelled! places where it all collapsed, and it always takes longer to rebuild than it does to just not destroy it all in the first place.
reset politics. leave the infrastructure please.
Reality unfortunately can be merciless, I myself am already preparing myself for the fact that I will be one of the first in line to die and I don’t care anymore.
I wanted to live in a civilization but not as a slave where even my thoughts are listened to while the world rots before my eyes. And where they can take everything away from me, even my soul, at any moment because someone in power wants it that way.
Why do we even want humanoid robots?
The same thing that made phones bigger, bandwidth wider, and probably one of the biggest uses of AI.
Horny people want sex without other people. In this case, sexbots.
Isn’t that what masturbation is for?