Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

alphaxion t1_ivh5fst wrote

The robot they showcased was worse than tech from 15 years ago. Asimo was worlds ahead of what they had people awkwardly and manually walk onto the stage. It looked less advanced than an A100 audio-animatronic found in Disney rides (the model that was running the Wicked Witch in the Great Movie Ride), never mind the latest A1000 model seen here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qteMlMAaNM

A generalised robot will be even more expensive than a specialised one, because it is orders of magnitude more complex to do the things you're talking about.

Without putting huge amounts of R&D money into the product and a team of hundreds of engineers, I fully doubt they'll have anything by 2030 that is close to what Boston Dynamics have today.

−1

Slightlydifficult t1_ivhafe7 wrote

Asimo was crazy for it’s time, it’s weird to think how long ago that was. The big difference is that asimo ran on preprogrammed maps while Tesla’s proposed bot will not need them. Asimo had some similar things with object detection but it was nowhere near as advanced as the occupancy network Tesla uses.

Generalized equipment is almost always cheaper to produce at scale. It’s certainly cheaper with a product like Optimus where the main selling point is the software. You don’t need multiple teams focusing on several different product lines. Maintenance is simplified and issues become much easier to identify and fix.

I think you should also consider that Optimus is running off of the same software as Tesla’s vehicles. They’ve already poured excessive amounts of money into R&D. They definitely need to have a crack team of engineers; like you’ve already noted, the actuation needs work. But even still, a functioning prototype put together in less than a year is absolutely wild for this level of robotics.

2

alphaxion t1_ivhm5md wrote

You're making a hell of a lot of assumptions, there. No-one has mass-produced any humanoid robot in decades of developing them.

There's also the major hurdle of how to power them. How long would a humanoid robot last on a charge? Will they be able to accomplish their tasks in the physical space they're looking to be operated within on that charge? Will the environment even be able to support something with the inevitably high weight they'll have?

The world we operate within is immensely complex, complete with people in it who are adversarial rather than compliant. The software for roads is proving a massive stumbling block already and that's semi-controlled. Hell, people have been discovering all sorts of issues with how those systems are sensing the world when they are adversarial to it, such as projecting different speed limits onto signs to trick the AI.
Free roaming in areas with squishy humans that don't have any of the safety features that modern cars have? I worry about our seeing the elderly crushed to death as someone with dementia freaks out in its company for the first time and knocks it over. Or where it cannot react in a quick enough time to the changing landscape of an industrial workplace and results in injury for the people still working there.

You're talking about this robot as if they've already got the solutions to fundamental aspects of both its design and its manufacturing sorted. It's not even a functioning prototype - it can't even walk unassisted. I'd also be extremely wary of claims made by Musk, the man who faked solar roof tiles for a demonstration.

I doubt a generalised (in function, that doesn't mean you can bolt together off the shelf components to manufacture it) humanoid robot will even be on the market by 2030. It's such a massively difficult task to accomplish, it takes humans near enough two decades before we consider them to be adults, and that's with millions of years of evolution behind us.

2050? That might be closer to the real timeframe when we can trust allowing these robots to walk amongst us.

1