Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Solid_Anxiety8176 t1_jaoz1mj wrote

One robot per person feels arbitrary. Why did they come up with that number?

39

zascar t1_japbnbn wrote

Elon musk said it yesterday in investor day

20

Philosopher83 t1_jaqxzg3 wrote

Possibly due to the more than one car per person in the US and the likely utility and corresponding desirability of such robots. Also, the notion of everyone gets one is a nice vision and plays on our emotional desire for egalitarian access to all that glitters

6

TheAIProfessor t1_jar3ltg wrote

I’m sure we’ll be financing some version of these things like we do cars, at a minimum.

3

TheAnonFeels t1_jas0ov5 wrote

If a robot can do all my housework and yard work (lol i don't got one), it would be well worth the payments, even at 50k+.

Cooking for me would pay for it's self alone.

4

roscid t1_jaqqtl6 wrote

I thought it was a reference to the Bill Gate’s quote from the 80s about “a computer on every desk and in every home.” Basically just a way of saying they want to make them affordable and ubiquitous enough that anyone who wants one can buy one, just like computers and cell phones went from expensive specialty tools to basic commodities. At least, that was my take.

5

superluminary t1_jaq8x6l wrote

It’s from the Tesla investor event a few days back where Elon speculated that we might end up with more than one robot per person, and what this would look like for the economy.

1

MeteorOnMars t1_jaq5lkr wrote

That is not arbitrary at all.

It doesn’t mean “8 billion robots”, it means a robot for each person.

This implies that every human has a physically capable ally.

0

archpawn t1_jaq6ja9 wrote

I feel like this could be taken two ways. One is that robots become so cheap and prevalent that everyone gets one. The other is that they're so good at doing different things that one per person is enough. You won't need one to vacuum your floor, one to mow your lawn, one to cook you food, and one to drive you around.

8

malcolmrey t1_jaq6dln wrote

> ally.

why do you assume that? why not overlord?

0