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

Reasons robotics is hard

secondthoughts.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 79 posts

Re: Reasons robotics is hard

#31

Post by lizagub »

Onavo wrote: post #8
GlenTheMachine wrote: post #3

Roboticist here. All of this, and he didn’t mention compliance or online adaptation to otherwise un-sensable dynamics. Or massively complex miniature mechanisms. Current generation tactile sensors cost a couple thousand $ PER FINGER, and have a real world MTBF of hours. The cost can be solved with economy of scale. The fragility is harder.

> Current generation tactile sensors cost a couple thousand $ PER FINGER, and have a real world MTBF of hours. The cost can be solved with economy of scale. The fragility is harder. Are we talking about experimental laboratory ones here? What happens when the Alibaba players start getting into the game? They have plenty of humanoid robots.

i think you can get some good surface for a few hundred $$ / few fingers here

https://xelarobotics.com/

Re: Reasons robotics is hard

#32

Post by lizagub »

UltraSane wrote: post #5
GlenTheMachine wrote: post #3

Roboticist here. All of this, and he didn’t mention compliance or online adaptation to otherwise un-sensable dynamics. Or massively complex miniature mechanisms. Current generation tactile sensors cost a couple thousand $ PER FINGER, and have a real world MTBF of hours. The cost can be solved with economy of scale. The fragility is harder.

I'm picturing humanoid robots having to operate in pairs so they can constantly fix each other.

i like this

Re: Reasons robotics is hard

#33

Post by stymaar »

ralph84 wrote: post #23
honr wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would only be a minor marker. A major marker would be whatever the Chinese equivalent(s) of Amazon are (Alibaba? etc.) going that route successfully. From academic / industrial conference presentations it appears Chinese services are banking on automation far more than an entity like Amazon does. That being said, I don't know what exact state the industrial automation technology is there and I can only extrapola…

Not sure about that. Labor costs are lower in China and the CCP is strongly incentivized to keep enough jobs around for humans to maintain their own hold on power.

The CCP is also well aware that it's facing a dramatic demographic contraction so they better prepare for that.

Re: Reasons robotics is hard

#34

Post by _carbyau_ »

People think robots in terms of humanoid or number-5 style robots.

I think it'll be more capable appliances at first.

Like a lawn mowing device that also spots weeds and can spray them.

Next iteration has arms to rip weeds out of the garden.

Next has attachments so you can direct it to do pruning.

Next it can figure out the pruning itself and move the outcome into the woodchipper.

And so on and so on.

It's not going to be one day a humanoid robot comes into the house and does everything.

Re: Reasons robotics is hard

#35

Post by tintor »

“If a self-driving car finds itself in a situation it can’t handle or suffers a glitch, it can pull over or, in the worst case, just hit the brakes.”

Wrong. Try hitting the brakes of your self driving car on highway at 65mph or during unprotected left turn with oncoming vehicles.

Or have a glitched self-driving car hit its brakes and block the road, for emergency vehicles, and endangering other people.

Self-driving cars can also suffer a glitch without knowing they suffered a glitch, like Waymo cars driving into flooded roads.

Re: Reasons robotics is hard

#36

Post by tintor »

“I may not care if my household robot takes all night to tidy up and fold the laundry.”

I do. I don’t want robot vacuuming or making noise at night or doing something potentially dangerous unmonitored while people are asleep.

Re: Reasons robotics is hard

#37

Post by horsawlarway »

_carbyau_ wrote: post #34

People think robots in terms of humanoid or number-5 style robots. I think it'll be more capable appliances at first. Like a lawn mowing device that also spots weeds and can spray them. Next iteration has arms to rip weeds out of the garden. Next has attachments so you can direct it to do pruning. Next it can figure out the pruning itself and move the outcome into the woodchipper. And so on and so on. It's not going…

While I agree this is a technical path that makes sense, I'm not sure it's a financial path that does. Or at least not outside of very upscale, niche products for wealthy consumers or businesses.

Which doesn't mean I disagree with you. I also think that this progression is the most likely. But it implies we're decades away from broad adoption rates.

Think fifty years to hit mass adoption, not five. (Because that much more closely aligns with other structurally disruptive tech like automobiles or computers) Which is definitely not the story being pitched to investors at the moment.

Re: Reasons robotics is hard

#38

Post by gandalfgreybeer »

_carbyau_ wrote: post #34

People think robots in terms of humanoid or number-5 style robots. I think it'll be more capable appliances at first. Like a lawn mowing device that also spots weeds and can spray them. Next iteration has arms to rip weeds out of the garden. Next has attachments so you can direct it to do pruning. Next it can figure out the pruning itself and move the outcome into the woodchipper. And so on and so on. It's not going…

Sometimes, I wonder why we even need humanoid robots for some tasks. For example, we had that robot over the past year that would wash the dishes...would be more efficient if it had 8 arms for that job. Or if I wanted it to clean my room, an arm that can extend up to the ceiling.

Re: Reasons robotics is hard

#39

Post by imtringued »

YuechenLi wrote: post #29

I mean, functional robotics isn't that hard, robotic vacuums have been in homes for a decade now, and industrial robotic arms. However, humanoid robots IS hard mainly because of the form factor constraints. You can't really get a lot of power out of servo motors and other actuator if it all has to be self-contained in a humanoid form instead of using hydraulics or pneumonic or even big stepper motors as for stationar…

Electric motors are absurdly power dense compared to human muscle.

The form factor has been solved basically everyone is building humanoid robots and hoping a transformer with a big enough dataset is going to do the rest.

Re: Reasons robotics is hard

#40

Post by _carbyau_ »

horsawlarway wrote: post #37
_carbyau_ wrote: post #34

People think robots in terms of humanoid or number-5 style robots. I think it'll be more capable appliances at first. Like a lawn mowing device that also spots weeds and can spray them. Next iteration has arms to rip weeds out of the garden. Next has attachments so you can direct it to do pruning. Next it can figure out the pruning itself and move the outcome into the woodchipper. And so on and so on. It's not going…

While I agree this is a technical path that makes sense, I'm not sure it's a financial path that does. Or at least not outside of very upscale, niche products for wealthy consumers or businesses. Which doesn't mean I disagree with you. I also think that this progression is the most likely. But it implies we're decades away from broad adoption rates. Think fifty years to hit mass adoption, not five. (Because that much…

> Or at least not outside of very upscale, niche products for wealthy consumers or businesses.

Products that start life as "for the rich, first adopters" and work their way down the economic classes are a thing. Whether it is the thing in this case I don't know.

> Which is definitely not the story being pitched to investors at the moment.

I would think that what is pitched is what investors want to hear....

Post reply on HN