Live data from Hacker News

Gemini Robotics On-Device brings AI to local robotic devices

deepmind.google

81–90 of 92 posts

Re: Gemini Robotics On-Device brings AI to local robotic devices

#82
post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The 1%/year failure rate appears to just be made up. There are plenty of electric motors that dont have anywhere near that failure rate (at least during the expected service life, failure rates certainly will probably hit 1%/year or higher eventually). For example, do the motors in hard drives fail anywhere close to 1% a year in the first ~5 years? Backblaze data gives a total drive failure rate around 1% and I imagi…

Yes, obviously that 1% figure is a simplification. Of course not all motors are created equal, and neither are all operating conditions! But the neat thing about my argument is it holds true regardless of the underlying failure rate! So long as your per-motor annual failure rate is >0, 43x it will be bigger than 3x it.

your calculation is true, but the absolute number is needed here.

43x of 1% failure rate is tragic, but 43x of 0.1% is acceptable in my book.

Re: Gemini Robotics On-Device brings AI to local robotic devices

#83

Elon Musk said in last week’s Starship Update: the very first Mars missions are planned to be flown by Optimus humanoid robots to scout and build basic infrastructure before humans arrive (full transcript + audio: https://transpocket.com/share/oUKhep6cUl3s/ ). If Gemini Robotics On-Device can truly adapt to new tasks with ~50–100 demos, pairing that with mass-produced Optimus bodies and Starship’s lift capacity could…

Elon Musk said in 2016 that we'd have fully autonomous cars by the end of the year and we'd be on Mars by 2018, with manned missions by 2024.

Fast forward to 2025, weeks have no self driving cars, and nothing is even close to getting to Mars, let alone manned

Re: Gemini Robotics On-Device brings AI to local robotic devices

#86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a simple matter of the number of motors you have. [1] Assume every motor has a 1% failure rate per year. A boring wheeled roomba has 3 motors. That's a 2.9% failure rate per year, and 8.6% failures over 3 years. Assume a humanoid robot has 43 motors. That gives you a 35% failure rate per year, and 73% over 3 years. That ain't good. And not only is the humanoid robot less reliable, it's also 14.3x the price - bec…

Would it be possible to reduce the failure rates?

Yes but like almost everything it comes down to cost. Most consumer devices are extremely cost constrained. Industrial robots can justify higher costs that come with higher reliability.

Re: Gemini Robotics On-Device brings AI to local robotic devices

#87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Natively multimodal LLM's are basically brains. Absolutely not.

Lol keep telling yourself that. It's not a human brain nor is it necessarily a very intelligent brain, but it is a brain nonetheless.

Not a useful commentary. ANN and BNN are slightly correlated. That fact that you want to believe it is a brain tells a lot about you, but it doesn’t make a model a brain.

Only suggestion I have is “study more”.

Re: Gemini Robotics On-Device brings AI to local robotic devices

#88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To maybe get a little carried away with the sci-fi for a minute, why does the Actuator need to cost anything? When the tree of costs that make up a product are traced, surely all the leaf nodes are human labour? As in, to make the actuator, I had to pay someone to assemble it and I had to buy the parts. Each part had a materials cost and a labour cost. So it goes for the factory that made the fasteners, the foundry t…

> When the tree of costs that make up a product are traced, surely all the leaf nodes are human labour? What about energy, real estate and taxes? Even at the extreme end of automation, if you want iron ore, you need to buy a mine from somebody, pay taxes on it, and power the machines to extract the minerals and transport them elsewhere for processing.

The same logic applies to energy I think. We don't have to pay money to a wind turbine, or to a coal mine. We only pay money to humans to build the power plants and the grid.

If I were writing a sci-fi novel about this I don't know how I'd handle something real estate (or mineral rights or water rights). You already need permission from the government to extract resources.

As for taxes, why does the government even want the money? What are they going to do with it?

Re: Gemini Robotics On-Device brings AI to local robotic devices

#89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When the tree of costs that make up a product are traced, surely all the leaf nodes are human labour? What about energy, real estate and taxes? Even at the extreme end of automation, if you want iron ore, you need to buy a mine from somebody, pay taxes on it, and power the machines to extract the minerals and transport them elsewhere for processing.

The same logic applies to energy I think. We don't have to pay money to a wind turbine, or to a coal mine. We only pay money to humans to build the power plants and the grid. If I were writing a sci-fi novel about this I don't know how I'd handle something real estate (or mineral rights or water rights). You already need permission from the government to extract resources. As for taxes, why does the government even w…

Energy, ultimately, requires real estate --and thus property taxes-- even at the logical extreme of automation.

> As for taxes, why does the government even want the money? What are they going to do with it?

There are websites that break down how e.g. different national/federal budgets are divvied up in the real world. Alternatively, I suggest a good book on macroeconomics; I am partial to Steve Keen's "Debunking Economics", but there are many others.

Re: Gemini Robotics On-Device brings AI to local robotic devices

#90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lol keep telling yourself that. It's not a human brain nor is it necessarily a very intelligent brain, but it is a brain nonetheless.

Not a useful commentary. ANN and BNN are slightly correlated. That fact that you want to believe it is a brain tells a lot about you, but it doesn’t make a model a brain. Only suggestion I have is “study more”.

They're not merely slightly correlated.

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

Just because it is alien to you, does not mean it is not a brain, please go look up the definition of the word.

And my comment is useful, a VLA implies it is processing it's input and output natively, something a brain does hence my comment.

Post reply on HN