Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hyundai buys Boston Dynamics

startupfortune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 431 posts

Re: Hyundai buys Boston Dynamics

#291

Post by 93po »

terramex wrote: post #61
Hugsbox wrote: post #31

I don't understand why they would implement humanoid robots instead of purpose-built robots. The human form is not the most optimal way to do most tasks, especially as it relates to manufacturing. Robots don't need to look like humans, they need to be useful . Seems like putting in an awful lot of extra unnecessary work to end up with a worse result.

Humanoidal robots make sense when they need to operate in spaces designed for humans bodies. Cars are designed and built to be used and serviced by humans, especially their interiors so you need humanoid robot to automate building them. Car exteriors are not built for humans to interact with so they are already being built by specialized robots.

This exactly. You need to mow and leaf blow and weed and edge lawns. You need to get transported in a car from location to location. You need hands to operate all these tools. And arms. And given landscaping, likely legs. You need to move bags of mulch. Fitting in human environments and using human tools is a huge thing for areas of work and life where it doesn't make sense to move a 2000 pound robotic arm around from place to place.

Dishes, laundry, house cleaning, cooking, food prep, organization, lawn work, car repair, home repair, etc etc etc. Expecting purpose built robots for every single task seems ridiculous.

Re: Hyundai buys Boston Dynamics

#292

Post by bluealienpie »

calebio wrote: post #271
browsingonly wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AI in its current form has limited usefulness for most people. That's not what I'm seeing. My mom always wanted Google to just answer questions, and now ChatGPT can. She uses it enough in her daily life that she bought a subscription. Yes, she knows it hallucinates and you have to double check everything, but so far she finds a ton of use for it even with those caveats. Now, I agree that a personal servant robot wo…

> That's not what I'm seeing. My mom always wanted Google to just answer questions, and now ChatGPT can. She uses it enough in her daily life that she bought a subscription. Reminds me a lot of AskJeeves :)

Google summaries from websites mainly did this before “AI” came around. Now I just don’t know the source unless I dig myself. Would rather it went back to before, or at least they implemented the veracity checks better.

I thought it was interested that the movie looper had argidrones, but what inspired that wasn’t part of the training set or discussion online. I get remarkably bad answers and search results which seem misleading at best.

Re: Hyundai buys Boston Dynamics

#293

Post by devilbunny »

what wrote: post #283
midnightclubbed wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment seems insane to me. Like at $50 an hour thats 30 hours a month, or 8 hoursish a week. How dirty or huge is the house? And $50 an hour is way over what most hourly degree edgucated workers earn so definitely not exploitation.

I pay $40/h for 4 hours once a month. If the wife had her way, it would be weekly.

But presumably would not be for four hours a week, since they would do more maintenance-like cleaning. Once a month, yeah, it’s going to take that long.

Re: Hyundai buys Boston Dynamics

#294

Post by kulahan »

cpgxiii wrote: post #264
kulahan wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't need robotics experience, I need automaker experience. Their software is universally terrible. Ford isn't a tech company, they don't even make their own robots. They buy them from someone else. What... positive experience do you have to assume that one of the lowest-tech industries in existence is somehow giving experience with some of the most advanced tech in the world?

> I don't need robotics experience, I need automaker experience. Their software is universally terrible. If you had any auto industry experience, you would know that the people responsible for the design and build of the physical car and the people responsible for the user-facing software are very separate (in fact, the user-facing software might be entirely contracted out). > What... positive experience do you have…

>commenting on an article about one of the largest automakers in the world buying out the remaining stake in the robotics development company

enhance:

>commenting on an article about one of the largest automakers in the world buying

ENHANCE:

>buying

It does not support your point to show that Hyundai is purchasing the company that actually built the robots.

If you want to make your point about how laughable it is that companies don't tend to be in the business of making highly advanced robots, you should probably not prove it with a company that essentially achieved world-largest-status before even finishing their straight-up purchase of this knowledge and tech.

Re: Hyundai buys Boston Dynamics

#295

Post by qnleigh »

> Atlas would need to learn new factory tasks in a day or two and reach 99.9% reliability before it could be truly useful on the floor

Progress in robotics has been impressive, but is there any evidence that we are approaching this point? How many days are needed to teach a robot a task at even 90% reliability? Given that most companies are still only showing of demos, that number looks to be way more than 2...

Re: Hyundai buys Boston Dynamics

#296

Post by metabagel »

bluealienpie wrote: post #292
calebio wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's not what I'm seeing. My mom always wanted Google to just answer questions, and now ChatGPT can. She uses it enough in her daily life that she bought a subscription. Reminds me a lot of AskJeeves :)

Google summaries from websites mainly did this before “AI” came around. Now I just don’t know the source unless I dig myself. Would rather it went back to before, or at least they implemented the veracity checks better. I thought it was interested that the movie looper had argidrones, but what inspired that wasn’t part of the training set or discussion online. I get remarkably bad answers and search results which see…

> Now I just don’t know the source unless I dig myself.

Claude includes links to references.

Re: Hyundai buys Boston Dynamics

#297

Post by tmp10423288442 »

metabagel wrote: post #296
bluealienpie wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google summaries from websites mainly did this before “AI” came around. Now I just don’t know the source unless I dig myself. Would rather it went back to before, or at least they implemented the veracity checks better. I thought it was interested that the movie looper had argidrones, but what inspired that wasn’t part of the training set or discussion online. I get remarkably bad answers and search results which see…

> Now I just don’t know the source unless I dig myself. Claude includes links to references.

So does ChatGPT. The hallucination problem is not completely solved, but much better than a few years ago, especially if you use reasoning mode, where it’s more likely to spontaneously do a web search

Re: Hyundai buys Boston Dynamics

#298

Post by insane_dreamer »

theptip wrote: post #206
glaslong wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is Boston Dynamics makes actual robots, which are much more limited than robots constructed from pure hype.

> If you show revenue, people will ask 'HOW MUCH?' and it will never be enough. The company that was the 100xer, the 1000xer is suddenly the 2x dog. But if you have NO revenue, you can say you're pre-revenue! You're a potential pure play... It's not about how much you earn, it's about how much you're worth. And who is worth the most? Companies that lose money! Being less cynical, I do think it’s fair to say that they…

you don't make it into the tres commas club by showing revenue

Re: Hyundai buys Boston Dynamics

#299

Post by toasterlovin »

browsingonly wrote: post #181
SoftTalker wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like a mistake. AI in its current form has limited usefulness for most people. Not something I would pay for to use outside of work. But a household robot that could clean, wash and fold the laundry, do the dishes, maybe even be a chauffeur... that would be huge. I think a lot of people would pay new-car money for something like that.

> AI in its current form has limited usefulness for most people. That's not what I'm seeing. My mom always wanted Google to just answer questions, and now ChatGPT can. She uses it enough in her daily life that she bought a subscription. Yes, she knows it hallucinates and you have to double check everything, but so far she finds a ton of use for it even with those caveats. Now, I agree that a personal servant robot wo…

FWIW, Google does just answer questions now.

Re: Hyundai buys Boston Dynamics

#300

Post by foresterre »

metabagel wrote: post #296
bluealienpie wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google summaries from websites mainly did this before “AI” came around. Now I just don’t know the source unless I dig myself. Would rather it went back to before, or at least they implemented the veracity checks better. I thought it was interested that the movie looper had argidrones, but what inspired that wasn’t part of the training set or discussion online. I get remarkably bad answers and search results which see…

> Now I just don’t know the source unless I dig myself. Claude includes links to references.

What's a problem though is that while it includes a reference, its distillation from the source, or worse, from the combination of sources, is often plain wrong. I check them regularly, and it made me very distrustful of Claude's capacity to faithfully summarise or explain from a source.

When asked to give specific links, it's usually even worse.

Post reply on HN