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

Gemini Robotics

deepmind.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 588 posts

Re: Gemini Robotics

#461

Post by genewitch »

flutas wrote: post #284
yorwba wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here it looks like its squeezing a grape instead: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyQs2OAIf-I&t=43s Bit hard to tell whether it remained intact.

The leaf on the darker grapes looks like a fabric leaf, I'd kinda bet they're all fake for these demos / testing. Don't need the robot to smash a grape when we can use a fake grape that won't smash.

Haha show the whole room and work either on a concrete floor or a transparent table.

This video reeks of the same shenanigans as perpetual motion machine videos.

Re: Gemini Robotics

#462

Post by diwank »

decimalenough wrote: post #380

I always thought that Asimov's Laws of Robotics ("A robot may not injure a human being" etc) were an interesting prop for science fiction, but wildly disconnected from the way computing & robotics actually work. Turns out he was just writing LLM prompts way ahead of his time.

Same. I guess in so many ways, he was remarkably prescient. Anthropic’s Constitutional AI approach is pretty much a living example

Re: Gemini Robotics

#463

Post by freeopinion »

ggm wrote: post #411
tkzed49 wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

are you implying that society shouldn't aim to reduce human interaction with vomit, feces, and dead animals? Robotics in harsh environments isn't unheard of

I think they're pointing out you need to be cautious assuming a robot can be economically, sustainably deployed to do jobs in environments which are challenging for electro-mechanical systems. An example: A friend worked on accurate built-in weighing machines for trucks, which could measure axle weight and load balance to meet compliance for bridges and other purposes. He found it almost impossible to make units whic…

It's interesting to think that it is more feasible (including economically) to expose humans to bleaches, acids, catalyst materials, electricity, abrasives, and sharp edges.

Re: Gemini Robotics

#464

Post by dzhiurgis »

ddalex wrote: post #449
dzhiurgis wrote: post #410

Hope they can offer this to robot vacuums with arms. Tidying up right now before vacuuming is a huge chore (kids stuff). Fuck it, make the arms big enough and it can do laundry, load/unload dishwasher, clean up after cooking/eating. I can finally see this happening. Probably Tesla first tho.

https://global.roborock.com/pages/roborock-saros-z70 ?

Not for sale yet. Nor it’s competitor Dreame. But CES is where I saw this and said “shut up and take my money”.

Re: Gemini Robotics

#465

Post by dagw »

genewitch wrote: post #457
dyauspitr wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it’s pretty straightforward to cover the entire torso of the robot with a plastic covering.

Why does it even need to be that type of robot, a conveyor that has items on it, but its a mesh, a camera looks, and if something can be sorted just use compressed air to move it to a collection area/bin. Put an electromagnet at the start of the conveyor that can move on a gantry to another bin. Why's everything gotta have arms and graspers it's so inefficient. Robots aren't climbing trees or chasing food. They don't…

Why's everything gotta have arms and graspers it's so inefficient.

We have designed a lot of processes and workplaces around the assumption that the 'machine' working there will be be around 160-190 cm tall, with two arms with graspers on the end and equipped with stereo colour vision cameras. The closer you make your new machine match that spec the less changes you have to make to your current setup. It also makes it easier to partially swap in robots over time, rather than ripping everything out and building something completely new.

Having worked at a company close to this field, the real answer through is that both approaches are being done right now. People building new facilities from scratch are building entirely automated system where the 'robot' is the whole machine. People with existing facilities are more interested in finding ways to add robots to their current workflow with minimal changes.

Re: Gemini Robotics

#466

Post by suyash »

hard_times wrote: post #59
suyash wrote: post #51

Robotics needs to become affordable for indie developers be able to hack them almost like Raspberry Pi projects.

Problem is that any sort of non-trivial robotics is easily weaponisable

I see your point about safety, but I think that needs to be be in the AI model than on the hardware side.

Re: Gemini Robotics

#468

Post by gonzobonzo »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #23
EncomLab wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the "Wozniak Standard" (sometimes called the Coffee Test) - Drop an AI enabled robot in front of a random house and ask it to bring you a cup of coffee. The robot would need to enter the house, locate the kitchen, locate the coffee machine, locate the coffee, locate the filters, locate the coffee mugs, locate a measuring spoon - then add the correct amount of water, the filter, the correct amount of coffee, s…

That’s a very high standard. I’d fail repeatedly.

You might refuse to do it, but I doubt you'd ever actually completely fail it. If someone offered to pay $10 million if someone could go into a house, make a cup of coffee, and come back out with it, I imagine just about any functional adult would figure out a way to return with a cup of some sort of liquid resembling coffee. I don't see anyone saying, "Sorry, making a cup of coffee is too difficult, I'm going to forfeit the $10 million."

But sure, without proper compensation a lot of people would probably just say "I can't do it" as a way of avoiding the task.

Re: Gemini Robotics

#469

Post by madmask »

ltsorry wrote: post #402
_carbyau_ wrote: post #368

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly I am so frustrated with the approach of "lets take a population of millions of people and ask them all to sort perfectly". 'Tis a silly thing. Some people won't care, some people will care but mistakes will happen, some people will care about money more and so will deliberately dump things in the wrong bucket. Get everyone to dump their crap into one pile and actually invest in industrial processes to sort t…

Picking up after your dog. Putting the grocery cart away after unloading. Shoveling the sidewalk in front of your house. Waiting to the side of the subway doors. Not talking during movies. We are asked to do hundreds of little things that mildly inconvenience us in order to maintain some social contract. Sure they could be made easier/nonexistent with better technology, but I: 1) don't see why asking people to do the…

If those things can be automated, we should not waste time doing them. It’s not like they are enjoyable anyway. Count the time wasted sorting stuff and multiply for millions and millions of households

Re: Gemini Robotics

#470

Post by Ukv »

moralestapia wrote: post #221
cvhc wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This really depends on which day of 2022 you start the calculation. But to be fair, you can claim the same for AAPL (+25%)/MSFT (+22%)/AMZN (+22%)/... It's just the up and down of the entire market (and these big techs dominate S&P 500). I don't think that actually indicates anything.

[flagged]

> But I did specify "start of 2022".

Your initial comment didn't:

> > GOOG is around the same price as it was in 2022

That's the comment pb7 replied to by saying it's up 90% since 2022 (which is true, or even an underestimate, depending on where you measure from) and to which you responded calling them a bot because your own measurement, from the start of the year, gives a lower number.

cvhc is pointing out that it's the different choice of where to measure from that caused the difference in results - neither are incorrect.

Post reply on HN