Are we at a point now where Asimov’s laws are programmed into these fellas somewhere?
Helix: A vision-language-action model for generalist humanoid control
81–90 of 178 posts
Re: Helix: A vision-language-action model for generalist humanoid control
#82Until we get robots with really good hands, something I'd love in the interim is a system that uses _me_ as the hands. When it's time to put groceries away, I don't want to have to think about how to organize everything. Just figure out which grocery items I have, what storage I have available, come up with an optimized organization solution, then tell me where to put things, one at a time. I'm cautiously optimistic…
I fully agree, building something like this is somewhere in my back log.
I think the key point why this "reverse cyborg" idea is not as dystopian as, say, being a worker drone in a large warehouse where the AI does not let you go to the toilet is that the AI is under your own control, so you decide on the high level goal "sort the stuff away", the AI does the intermediate planning and you do the execution.
We already have systems like that, every time you use you tell your navi where you want to go, it plans the route and gives you primitive commands like "on the next intersection, turn right", so why not have those for cooking, doing the laundry, etc.?
Heck, even a paper calendar is already kinda this, as in separating the planning phase from the execution phase.
Re: Helix: A vision-language-action model for generalist humanoid control
#83There’s nothing I want more than a robot that does house chores. That’s the real 10x multiplier for humans to do what they do best.
Yeah, except that future doesn't need us. By us I mean those of us who don't have $1B to their name. Do you really expect the oligarchs to put up with the environmental degradation of 8 billion humans when they can have a pristine planet to themselves with their whims served by the AI and these robots? I fully anticipate that when these things mature enough we'll see an "accidental" pandemic sweep and kill off 90% of…
Oligarchs would use the robots to kill people instead of a pandemic. A virus carries too much risk of affecting the original creators.
Fortunately, robotic capability like that basically becomes the equivalent of Nuclear MAD.
Unfortunately, the virus approach probably looks fantastic to extremist bad actors with visions of an afterlife.
Re: Helix: A vision-language-action model for generalist humanoid control
#84I'm always wondering at the safety measures on these things. How much force is in those motors? This is basically safety-critical stuff but with LLMs. Hallucinating wrong answers in text is bad, hallucinating that your chest is a drawer to pull open is very bad.
The thing in the video moves slower than the sloth in Zootopia. If you die by that robot, you probably deserve it.
As a sibling comment implies though, there's also danger from it being stupid while unsupervised. For example, I'd be very nervous having it do something autonomously in my kitchen for fear of it burning down my house by accident.
Re: Helix: A vision-language-action model for generalist humanoid control
#85At this point, this is enough autonomy to have a set of these guys man a howitzer (read as old stockpiles of weapons we already have). Kind of a scary thought. On one hand, I think the idea of moving real people out of danger in war is a good idea, and as an American i'd want Americans to have an edge... and we can't guarantee our enemies won't take it if we skip it, on the other hand I have a visceral reaction to ma…
We had sufficient AI to make death machines for decades. You don't need fancy LLMs to get a pretty good success rate for targeting.
I have said for years that the only thing keeping us from "stabby the robot" is solving the power problem. If you can keep a drone going for a week, you have a killing machine. Use blades to avoid running out of ammo. Use IR detection to find the jugular. Stab, stab and move on. I'm guessing "traditional" vision algorithms are also sufficient to, say, identify an ethnicity and conduct ethnic cleansing. We are "solving the power problem" away from a new class of WMDs that are accessible to smaller states/groups/individuals.
Re: Helix: A vision-language-action model for generalist humanoid control
#86There’s nothing I want more than a robot that does house chores. That’s the real 10x multiplier for humans to do what they do best.
I'd pay $2k for something that folds my laundry reliably. It doesn't need arms or legs, just like my dishwasher doesn't need arms or legs. It just needs to let me dump in a load of clean laundry and output stacks of neatly folded or hung clothing.
Re: Helix: A vision-language-action model for generalist humanoid control
#87I'm always wondering at the safety measures on these things. How much force is in those motors? This is basically safety-critical stuff but with LLMs. Hallucinating wrong answers in text is bad, hallucinating that your chest is a drawer to pull open is very bad.
Not a big deal on the battlefield.
I'd say a very big deal when munitions and targeting are involved
Re: Helix: A vision-language-action model for generalist humanoid control
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
The thing in the video moves slower than the sloth in Zootopia. If you die by that robot, you probably deserve it.
Are you saying it cannot move faster than they because of some kind of governor?
A governor, the firmware in the motor controllers, something like that. Certainly not the neural network though.
Re: Helix: A vision-language-action model for generalist humanoid control
#89There’s nothing I want more than a robot that does house chores. That’s the real 10x multiplier for humans to do what they do best.
It's called a "house cleaner" and they only cost ~$150 (area and all varies) bi-weekly. I'll shit a brick (and then have the robot clean it up) if a robot is ever cheaper than ~$4000/yr.
Yeah, but a robot will work 24/7, not 2h byweekly -_-
Re: Helix: A vision-language-action model for generalist humanoid control
#90Until we get robots with really good hands, something I'd love in the interim is a system that uses _me_ as the hands. When it's time to put groceries away, I don't want to have to think about how to organize everything. Just figure out which grocery items I have, what storage I have available, come up with an optimized organization solution, then tell me where to put things, one at a time. I'm cautiously optimistic…
Yeah there’s more to it than that. Do you want a can of beans to be put in the utensil draw just because it would fit? If it was done as you describe the placement of all of your items would be almost random each time, the bot need to have contextual memory and familiarity with your storage habits and preferences.
This can be done of course, in your statement the phrase “just figure out” is doing a lot more heavy lifting than you allude to