Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a hardware engineer I hear this a lot from software/electrical folks. It's Moore's law that largely drove what you describe. Moore's law only applies to semiconductors. Gears, motors and copper wire are not going to get 10x faster/cheaper every 18 months or whatever. 10 years from now gears will cost more, they will cost what they cost now plus inflation. I've literally heard super smart YC founders say they just…
Think about cars. Their manufacturers work really hard on efficient (cost and performance). And what people do with them is a very different story. It could see the same happening with robots.
Figure 03, our 3rd generation humanoid robot
391–400 of 417 posts
Re: Figure 03, our 3rd generation humanoid robot
#392Earlier quoted context omitted.
If humanoid robots can perform ok on a broader set of tasks then they could reach economies of scale that a robot arm might not.
There are couple UR5 single arm cobots on eBay at $5.5k each right at this moment. The truth is that the value of humanoid is in it form, the novelty, the sense of accomplishment, not features.
Re: Figure 03, our 3rd generation humanoid robot
#393Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is not the gears, motors and copper wire that are bottlenecking robots. It is the software and computing. We can already build a robot hand that is faster, stronger, more dexterous, etc. than a human hand. What we can't do right now is make the software to perceive the world around it and utilize the hand to interact with it at human levels. That is something that needs computing power and effective software. Thos…
Yes, but the two (software and hardware) scale very differently. Once software is "done" (we all know software is never done) you can just copy it and distribute it. It is negligiblehow much it costs to do so. Once hardware is done you have to manufacture each and every piece of hardware with the same care, detail and reliability as the first one. You can't just click copy. Often times you have to completely redesign…
It's not quite startrek replicator but much closer to that than the US view of manufacturing where you have your union guy sitting in front of the machine to pull the lever.
Re: Figure 03, our 3rd generation humanoid robot
#394Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bollocks. I wouldn’t care if it looked like Chewbacca if it did the household chores, had a good warranty and was repairable, and cost under $30k. I’m not f##king the robot maid, I don’t care if it looks like a girl. If I was into that, there are other types of ‘robots’ for that.
I'm not saying everyone, everywhere, wants to fuck their robot maid, I'm saying thousands of years of patriarchy, hundreds of years of popular culture, fetishization of domestic labor roles and simple human nature will have an influence on the adoption of humanoid domestic robots that companies ignore at their peril. Some people are Honda Civic people, only concerned with utility - that's fine, I'm the same way. But…
Roomba uses AI in some of their models, but people aren't trying to have a relationship with them. Because it is AI to serve a utilitarian purpose that does not involve imitating human behavior. People have relationships with chatbots because they are specifically imitating human behavior. Putting googly eyes on your Roomba isn’t the same as falling in love with a chatbot.
Cars are very very publicly visible, so they are used to project some sort of image to others; like the clothes people wear. Most people don't wear clothes or drive cars for purely utilitarian purposes. Often people will buy clothes or cars that look utilitarian to project an image about themselves. People buy furniture and decorate their homes to project an image. People do not buy their water heater to project a certain image about themselves. Robot vacuums are frustrating to watch. They get the job done in the end (most of the time) but their random zig zags or difficulty navigating around objects is something most people don’t want to see. They just want the result. Huminoid robots will be like that for a significant amount of time, where they can empty the dishwasher, but it will be painfully slow, odd looking, and very unhuman-like. People won’t want to see this but they will want the job done so they don’t have to do it. A robot that can perform utilitarian household chores would be a huge industry and would be used by most people like a dishwasher or water heater, primarily for its utility.
A robot that reaches the level that it could be a companion, operating visibly with/around people (bringing you and your guests refreshments rather than slowly, awkwardly folding clothes alone in a bedroom while you are at work or downstairs watching a movie) would very likely have a huge pressure to fit cultural and gender dynamics.
Re: Figure 03, our 3rd generation humanoid robot
#395Techie people, myself included seem chronically unable to understand why people prefer inefficient, higher level tools over the efficient low level ones. Low level tools require an investment of time and brainpower to configure. Consider the time it takes to set up a dishwasher- research, buying, installing, reading the manual. Vs telling your humanoid robot “go wash the dishes”. People will pay a lot more and put up…
Yes, but there's also a limit. For the dishwashing, consider that you can already exchange money for a maximally efficient, maximally flexible solution: you can hire someone to do your dishes. How much would you pay for a live in, automata like servant who washes all your dishes for you? What about if they could do many other things? $1k? $5k? $100k? What about the maintenance? What're the ongoing costs like? Sure, i…
Clearly humans are of the first sort, just like this robot.
To the current example you gave - I would argue that humans require a huge amount of configuration/maintenance - far more than any machine. Of course they are definitely effective at tasks once they get going.
As to what price/generality/reliability level I think people would really prefer - I guess we'll have to wait and see when these come on the market, if they ever do. It's nearly midnight where I am and my morning confidence in humanoid robots has waned a little
Re: Figure 03, our 3rd generation humanoid robot
#396Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course it does not. We just add scanners in up down left and right of the conveyor. Never touching the package.
This was my solution as well. Why even have a robot? Give me a conveyor belt, some cameras and a moderately powerful SBC and I think I could probably manage a system that does one package a second with a fallback for humans to process what can't be processed by the machine.
If it's just checking or adding labels, it's silly to even use that.
Re: Figure 03, our 3rd generation humanoid robot
#397Earlier quoted context omitted.
> one-time robot purchase. With a hefty subscription to make it do anything useful.
I can already run the Qwen3 VL multimodal model for text, image processing, and speech recognition and generation on a well spec'd home workstation. And the Unitree R1 already only costs $6k. All the necessary pieces are aligning, very rapidly, and as James Burke has pointed out, that's when Connections happen.
Re: Figure 03, our 3rd generation humanoid robot
#398Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, why have a washing machine when you can just let your droid hand wash the dishes? At high enough temperatures and proper scrub that's likely going to be better and take less time.
Not droid, just arms. If it needs to be fast, lift weights (just the arms or even more), have high quality cameras and be connected to a lot of compute, it needs AC from the grid. AC wires, better not move around, especially when there is water. It has to be mounted on the wall.
It might be a bit fragile though.
Re: Figure 03, our 3rd generation humanoid robot
#399Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, but the two (software and hardware) scale very differently. Once software is "done" (we all know software is never done) you can just copy it and distribute it. It is negligiblehow much it costs to do so. Once hardware is done you have to manufacture each and every piece of hardware with the same care, detail and reliability as the first one. You can't just click copy. Often times you have to completely redesign…
China has shown that they don't scale all that differently. Yes the tooling is hard to build but after that you hit go and the factory makes the copies for you. It's not quite startrek replicator but much closer to that than the US view of manufacturing where you have your union guy sitting in front of the machine to pull the lever.
Re: Figure 03, our 3rd generation humanoid robot
#400Earlier quoted context omitted.
That doesn’t even remotely follow. Human work is designed for humans so if you want human work done you need a human to do it. If you want to replace the human the best bet is to redesign the work so that it can be done with machine assistance, which is what we’ve been doing since the industrial revolution. There’s a reason the motor car (which is the successful mass market personal transportation machine) doesn’t lo…
I don't think that it's human work this would target, but instead work in shared human spaces.