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

Why humanoid robots won't catch up to human workers any time soon

understandingai.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 74 posts

Re: Why humanoid robots won't catch up to human workers any time soon

#31

Post by somenameforme »

seydor wrote: post #18

I dont get the investment in humanoids beyond trying to create some kind of stock market bubble again. Factories that have already heavily robotized their production, employ a minimal amount of humans to do niche work. It's going to be immensely difficult to replace that niche work with any kind of robot, let alone humanoids. These humanoid robots (or generally limbed robots) could be useful for the two sectors that…

Imagine LLMs reach their potential and the general field of 'cognitive work' starts to be able to be largely automated. What happens then? I think there's some precedent with the Industrial Revolution. The increased productivity and the like did lead to some 'super farms' and the like, but the real change is that it left a vacuum in the economy. That vacuum was filled by industry such that even the 'super farms' started to be a vanishingly small part of the overall economy.

I think the same will happen with LLMs. They're going to create a vacuum in the economy, on a global level. And I think what will come next is something in the real world (as opposed to the digital) filling it. Humanoid robots might be myopic, but I think it's, at worst, a pretty decent guess. One basic goal would be able to automate typical service jobs, both in terms of normal employment - but also even within households. A low cost highly capable robotic maid would have a massive market.

I'm hand-waving away the dystopia of this all, because I ultimately think humans will still play a key role - but trying to predict what that role may be is impossible from where we're standing. Imagine trying to predict the consequences of mass industrialization when you've lived you're entire life in an agrarian society. There's just no real basis for an intelligent prediction, besides 'way different.'

Re: Why humanoid robots won't catch up to human workers any time soon

#33

Post by strken »

imglorp wrote: post #30
treis wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Housework is the obvious use case.

Hands yes, for all the human actuated things. You don't need 2 legs to do that. Cantilevered wheels might be better for stair climbing around the house. A better obvious use case for fully humanoid is vehicles. Jump into a forklift, combine, or golf cart and be immediately productive. Then jump out and a human can use the vehicle still.

That seems kind of nuts when you could stick a few solenoids on the pedals and steering wheel, mount the sensors from the head onto the chassis, and skip the need for a humanoid robot.

Re: Why humanoid robots won't catch up to human workers any time soon

#34

Post by elictronic »

dosisking wrote: post #14
tootie wrote: post #9

I have a few thoughts. Number one is that humanoid robots are probably a dead end. It's movie stuff. It makes me think of Henry Ford saying customers want "faster horses". It is the fault of evolution that we don't have wheels but we don't have to repeat that mistake. Secondly I think robot butlers are a bridge too far. The article explains pretty well why the spatial reasoning is problematic but so would things like…

> I think if we want to pilot autonomous robots it will be factory floors and other rote tasks. Maybe installing solar fields or something. Let them achieve a perfect safety record in someplace with more risk tolerance then take the next step. No, these autonomous robots will be used by the military as soldiers. There will be no attempt to achieve a "perfect safety record". These soldiers are already here, pay attent…

The conversation is about humanoid robots, not wheeled/tracked objects with a gun or carrying cargo.

We have had remote controlled objects like this in various forms going back to WW2 and a few instances before. A wireless/fiber/starlink connection was added recently making them more robust. This is not a humanoid because they don't make sense from a power/weight carrying/so many other perspectives.

The only thing unique to the Ukrainian situation is the widescale usage.

Re: Why humanoid robots won't catch up to human workers any time soon

#35

Post by ModernMech »

seydor wrote: post #18

I dont get the investment in humanoids beyond trying to create some kind of stock market bubble again. Factories that have already heavily robotized their production, employ a minimal amount of humans to do niche work. It's going to be immensely difficult to replace that niche work with any kind of robot, let alone humanoids. These humanoid robots (or generally limbed robots) could be useful for the two sectors that…

Sexbots. That's it, that's the whole thing. And slaves in general but yeah.

Re: Why humanoid robots won't catch up to human workers any time soon

#36

Post by [deleted] »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #17
DiggyJohnson wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could have made the same point without starting with the insult.

The original commentator works at a private equity fund, admits he has lost $1B twice, and yet any blue-collar laborer has a better grasp of the material world. The insult is earned.

[deleted]

Re: Why humanoid robots won't catch up to human workers any time soon

#37

Post by jillesvangurp »

They don't have to catch up, they just have to be good enough on a narrow set of tasks to be worth the trouble. Perfect is the enemy of good here. Everything I've seen suggests that the prototypes are already pretty good at simple tasks that involve recognizing, picking up, and putting things into/onto other things in some way.

All the dancing, jumping, running, etc. is nice for marketing but not actually that urgent for such tasks. Dexterity is nice. There are plenty of examples of humanoid robots doing pretty fiddly stuff like folding t-shirts and other things.

The rest is just optimization where these things gradually get faster, efficient, do more complex things, etc.

Re: Why humanoid robots won't catch up to human workers any time soon

#38

Post by imglorp »

strken wrote: post #33
imglorp wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hands yes, for all the human actuated things. You don't need 2 legs to do that. Cantilevered wheels might be better for stair climbing around the house. A better obvious use case for fully humanoid is vehicles. Jump into a forklift, combine, or golf cart and be immediately productive. Then jump out and a human can use the vehicle still.

That seems kind of nuts when you could stick a few solenoids on the pedals and steering wheel, mount the sensors from the head onto the chassis, and skip the need for a humanoid robot.

You could say the same about the dishwasher, lathe, and whatever else. I guess the use case is a humanoid bot can use all the human things without modifying them.

Re: Why humanoid robots won't catch up to human workers any time soon

#39

Post by teachrdan »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #37

They don't have to catch up, they just have to be good enough on a narrow set of tasks to be worth the trouble. Perfect is the enemy of good here. Everything I've seen suggests that the prototypes are already pretty good at simple tasks that involve recognizing, picking up, and putting things into/onto other things in some way. All the dancing, jumping, running, etc. is nice for marketing but not actually that urgent…

> they just have to be good enough on a narrow set of tasks to be worth the trouble

Depends on the context. If they are to work around human beings, particularly in the home, then they must be safe... to work around humans.

If a humanoid robot hits a human being, knocks one over, or even falls down on top of one -- especially a child, who is more fragile and whose movements are unpredictable -- then the industry as a whole faces a huge setback. Just look at what happened when a "self-driving" Uber ran over and killed a pedestrian in Arizona.

Re: Why humanoid robots won't catch up to human workers any time soon

#40

Post by jessetemp »

somenameforme wrote: post #31
seydor wrote: post #18

I dont get the investment in humanoids beyond trying to create some kind of stock market bubble again. Factories that have already heavily robotized their production, employ a minimal amount of humans to do niche work. It's going to be immensely difficult to replace that niche work with any kind of robot, let alone humanoids. These humanoid robots (or generally limbed robots) could be useful for the two sectors that…

Imagine LLMs reach their potential and the general field of 'cognitive work' starts to be able to be largely automated. What happens then? I think there's some precedent with the Industrial Revolution. The increased productivity and the like did lead to some 'super farms' and the like, but the real change is that it left a vacuum in the economy. That vacuum was filled by industry such that even the 'super farms' star…

You're saying the vacuum in the economy (people without an income source) will be filled by something else that leaves people without an income source? Who's paying for the robots? If people find themselves with more time than money, they're not going to buy robots to free up more time
Post reply on HN