> A properly designed robot can open doors, use tools, climb stairs, lift boxes, and more without a human-like form.

can it do that in a "designed for human" spaces along with being general purpose to switch between tasks

Wouldn’t it be cool if you could let the robot work for you? I mean like go to work for you. Ahh a man can dream.

On a different note, I was born in 84 and it’s kind of been pretty insane growing up from analogue to digital and in such a short time AI and robotics. I don’t think theirs ever been a time in history where we’ve seen life changing inventions every 7 years or so.

> compete at the national, or maybe even international level

speed of light hasn't changed. Networks get better throughput but latency remains.

For work where you need to have dexterity and reflexes locally piloted will be better. (though not everything will need that level of feedback)

You're asking the right questions!

I don’t wanna do this but whatever is higher than trillions could be there. With inflation by the time we get there especially. Imagine every human on the planet having access to a robot. Could sell so many variations and customizations. Could sell software to change what the robot does. It’s insane the possibilities.

"Our world is designed for the human form: → Arms and hands allow us to open doors and use tools. → Legs allow us to move efficiently, climb stairs, lift boxes, and more. For 100 years, robots that can do human-like tasks have been unattainable"

This is just... demonstrably untrue, as any automated assembly line can show.

A properly designed robot can open doors, use tools, climb stairs, lift boxes, and more without a human-like form. Trying to fit utility into a predefined mold is putting form before function. It's limiting and a gross misstep.

Billions? This is Trillions territory and frankly more.

>- if that doesn't = cheap or free food, we're doing it wrong.

Free is impossible since there will always be costs no matter the efficiency. But I agree with cheap.

Do you know any of those people, and do you know with 100% certainty what their day currently looks like and what they're up to?

I'm sceptic of these kinda things ever since I saw that one fake AI generated LinkedIn profile that said it was a Stripe alum. It even attracted a VC who wanted to invest lol.

Not saying it's the case here but make an organigram with some faces, names and slap some Apple, Tesla and Google logos next to their names and 9 people out of 10 will be sold. I know I would have, if it weren't for being more careful now thanks to that article a few days ago.

This is not possible within 5 years! The human body needs about 100B sensors and more than 670 actors to function well. This is AGI^2. There is first some basic work to be done on artificial skin and superefficient actors. Let us remember that all of these actors and sensors are a extended part of the brain!

Good call. If advancement in robotics outpaces artificial intelligence, remote operation by humans would be the best way to close the gap.

The downside would be that professions that previously were safe in their local cities or states would now have to compete at the national, or maybe even international level with other people. Why hire your local plumber or electrician when you can have the best plumbers and electricians in the country instead?

It would be a lot like watching local newspapers decline while the big national papers survive. Or watching video rental chains get replaced by online streaming. Or watching mom & pop stores driven out of business by big box stores and online shopping.

It's a big game of musical chairs, and every new innovation takes another seat out of the game.

It's a ridiculous design for a home good. Imagining that thing walking around my house at night is nightmarish -- and it will always be. Sleek is a lot easier to do now than home-friendly so I get their decision though. I'm pretty sure we are going to get screens with AI-generated realistic faces on the robots asap rather than the black hole fairly early.

Give them a robot and it can build them plumbing and a hot tub.

Theranos?

I don’t think that ended well for the company founder?

Funny, but ultimately futile. Much like a zombie apocalypse, the real threat wouldn't lie with just one hostile robot. It would be an entire army of them, moving without a hint of hesitation or self preservation to carry out one goal: to subdue or execute you.

Human life is cheap, but artificial life will be cheaper. Whether it's a relatively dumb group of robots that lack the full movement range of a person, or a team of robots that are being piloted by people from a remote location, or fully autonomous, artificially intelligent units that have acquired a level of combat training and dexterity that surpasses the best trained human soldier, the ultimate outcome is the same.

They can throw bodies at you, overwhelm you with sheer numbers until you run out of bullets or make one wrong move. They can apply combat tactics knowing that if you take one down, they can quickly replace the unit with another of the same skill level. One way or the other, they will wear you down until you can no longer fight.

Needless to say, the potential applications for crime, terrorism and authoritarianism are dire.

I understand the meanings of both '2' and '3+6,' while a calculator does not comprehend the significance of these numbers. However, the only difference between me and a calculator is that I had to learn the meaning of these numbers because my mind was not pre-programmed. The meanings of numbers are abstract concepts that are useful in the learning process, and creating these abstractions in my mind was likely the only way to learn how to perform calculations.

Neural networks have the ability to learn how to do math and create algorithms for calculations. The question is, whether they can create these abstractions to aid in the learning process. I believe that the answer is almost certainly yes, depending on the architecture and training process.

The statement, "they do 'learn,' but only to the extent of their programming," is open to multiple interpretations. While it is true that the learning ability of neural networks is limited by their programming, we use neural networks specifically to create algorithms that we cannot program ourselves. They are capable of performing tasks that we are unable to program them to do, maybe one of these task is to infer meaning and concepts from the training.

It's Elon, so it will be promised within 5 years with a flawed and/or abandoned implementation in 10 years.

Get Doofenshmirtz involved in the design - he was always good at red off-button placement.

based

You're right. We have to prepare for the robot dumps.

[deleted]

Didn't the Jetsons predict it?

This robot design doesn’t make much sense. Why is the torso a cage? Shouldn’t if have hydraulics or at least some moving parts to simulate a core? Because that’s super important for things like balance and strength and literally everything that this robot is meant to do?

Actually, the makers of chatgpt can’t tell how it decides what to say in answer to a question. My understanding is there is a black box between the training data and the answers given by the model.

How do you, this lady writing about octopuses or anyone else “know” that. No one knows how consciousness works. No one really understands how LLMs convert training data into answers. So how can anyone say so definitively what is or isn’t happening. I understand different people have different opinions and some people believe that chatgpt is just a stochastic parrot. I can accept anyone having this opinion, I get frustrated when people state this opinion as fact. The fact is no one knows for sure at the moment.