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

51–60 of 78 posts

Re: Reasons robotics is hard

#51

Post by alex43578 »

pinkmuffinere wrote: post #44

> I am confused at how Waymo engineering can be so robust as to yield an astonishingly good safety record, and yet so slapdash as to happily drive into deep water. I feel this is actually somewhat straightforward. I assume deep water on roadways is not commonly in the training set, because frankly it isn't common in real life, and when it is common people do not drive and do not gather that training data. As a result…

People drive into deep water all the time - some states specifically have laws making them financially liable for the cost of rescue because it’s such a stupid thing to do. But still, they do it.

Re: Reasons robotics is hard

#52

Post by aleph_minus_one »

lukan wrote: post #46
UltraSane wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Also so they can watch each other, in case of the humans trying to shut them down.

> Also so they can watch each other, in case of the humans trying to shut them down.

That's why the human operator needs a gun. :-)

Re: Reasons robotics is hard

#53

Post by bananaflag »

xxs wrote: post #41
tintor wrote: post #36

“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.

Small cleaning robots have existed for long enough. For floor sweeping they are more efficient than any 2-legged form. Not folding the laundry, though.

Not for the kind of floor I have with tons of obstacles and small corners.

Re: Reasons robotics is hard

#55

Post by yorwba »

AngryData wrote: post #42
ralph84 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Labor being cheap is more of a locale dependent condition in China now, their well developed cities and industries have had rising wages for 2+ decades now and the labor discount is small enough to be more like a side-benefit to already manufacturing in China, rather than a driving force to outsource to China. China has itself started outsourcing certain productions to chase cheaper labor prices.

That labor costs are rising and are now significantly above poorer countries like Bangladesh or Myanmar doesn't mean they're anywhere near high-income countries or above the cost of automation for low-volume tasks like last-mile delivery, which drivers do for under a dollar per trip: https://archive.ph/SizjZ

Automation can make sense even with low labor costs if it enables higher volume. Like nobody is paying humans to chisel individual screws by hand, because machines can do it quicker and better, and therefore cheaper.

But you can't substantially increase the volume of last-mile delivery by replacing the human with a robot, because the robot would have to move faster, and moving faster would be dangerous. So robotic automation of low-volume tasks can be expected to happen in high-income countries first.

Re: Reasons robotics is hard

#57

Post by andai »

Animats wrote: post #17

A marker of progress will be when Amazon converts to automated picking. They've been trying hard for almost a decade now. They had an annual competition for years. They have a decent picking robot developed in house.[1] It's not being deployed in quantity yet. Nor does it have anything like a humanoid hand. Just a two-surface gripper. Amazon's production robots are mostly automatic guided vehicles, not manipulators.…

I worked at a warehouse a few years ago. Over lunch a manager bragged to me with some secret videos of experimental facilities. Semi-automated, and fully-automated. I don't know how far along they were though.

But the intention was very clearly to get rid of all of us, as soon as physically possible.

(Otherwise gran will switch to $competitor!)

Re: Reasons robotics is hard

#58

Post by chrisjj »

> AI progress is racing along, but virtually all of the visible progress is in the realm of knowledge work, i.e. activities that can take place inside a computer.

The most visible "progress" of so-called AI is in activities that take place at the interface between computers and gullible humans.

The reason so much less progress has been made in robots is that real-world physics isn't gullible.

Re: Reasons robotics is hard

#59

Post by amelius »

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 don't think that's true. AI could work around all the physical imperfections.

Just imagine yourself controlling an imperfect robot with some joysticks or maybe a sensor suit. You'd certainly do much better than current robots. The limit is the robot's brain, not the physical actuators/sensors.

Post reply on HN