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

OpenAI disbands its robotics research team

venturebeat.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 128 posts

Re: OpenAI disbands its robotics research team

#81

Post by modeless »

iandanforth wrote: post #76
modeless wrote: post #68

I think most people believe that the problem with robots is that we don't have the right software, and if we just knew how to program them then today's robots could be incredibly useful in everyday life. From that perspective, this move from OpenAI seems dumb. That belief is wrong. Today's robots can't be made useful in everyday life no matter how advanced the software. The hardware is too inflexible, too unreliable,…

You're demonstrably wrong. I can waldo any number of commercially available arms to do work humans do today. Surgeons waldo precise robots to conduct surgeries as a matter of course. Every piece of construction machinery operated by a human today is an incredibly useful robot lacking sufficiently capable software. "When the hardware is ready, the software will be comparatively easy to develop." I take it you've never…

> I can waldo any number of commercially available arms to do work humans do today

Not for everyday tasks with anywhere near the efficiency, reliability, speed, and cost that humans have without robots. You can't waldo any robot to do the laundry or the cooking in a normal home anywhere near as well as a human can do it. (I'd love to see you try!)

Sure, you can make a robot that can do work humans can't. You can make a robot stronger, or more precise, or better suited to repetitive motion than a human. Those attributes are useful in specialized tasks. But generally not for the everyday tasks humans do today that we want robots to help us with. For everyday tasks you need a robot that is comparable in speed, efficiency, weight, reliability, durability, flexibility, sensor capability, and cost to a human. Not one of those areas, but all of them simultaneously. That's the hard part.

Re: OpenAI disbands its robotics research team

#82

Post by shalmanese »

syockit wrote: post #78
iandanforth wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're demonstrably wrong. I can waldo any number of commercially available arms to do work humans do today. Surgeons waldo precise robots to conduct surgeries as a matter of course. Every piece of construction machinery operated by a human today is an incredibly useful robot lacking sufficiently capable software. "When the hardware is ready, the software will be comparatively easy to develop." I take it you've never…

Off-topic but this is the first time I've seen waldo used as a verb. It's not in the Urban Dictionary, but from the way you use it I take it that it means "to find the correct thing out of the sea of so many similar things", right?

It comes from the Heinlein short story Waldo: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldo_(short_story)

> Waldo Farthingwaite-Jones was born a weakling, unable even to lift his head up to drink or to hold a spoon. Far from destroying him, this channeled his intellect, and his family's money, into the development of the device patented as "Waldo F. Jones' Synchronous Reduplicating Pantograph". Wearing a glove and harness, Waldo could control a much more powerful mechanical hand simply by moving his hand and fingers.

Re: OpenAI disbands its robotics research team

#83

Post by joe_the_user »

modeless wrote: post #81
iandanforth wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're demonstrably wrong. I can waldo any number of commercially available arms to do work humans do today. Surgeons waldo precise robots to conduct surgeries as a matter of course. Every piece of construction machinery operated by a human today is an incredibly useful robot lacking sufficiently capable software. "When the hardware is ready, the software will be comparatively easy to develop." I take it you've never…

> I can waldo any number of commercially available arms to do work humans do today Not for everyday tasks with anywhere near the efficiency, reliability, speed, and cost that humans have without robots. You can't waldo any robot to do the laundry or the cooking in a normal home anywhere near as well as a human can do it. (I'd love to see you try!) Sure, you can make a robot that can do work humans can't. You can make…

Even if this is true, that weakens your point that hardware is the fundamental limit for robots. If there are situations where software giving human like behavior to a robot could be extremely valuable, then there's certainly a motivation for generic AI companies to be in that area.

That doesn't mean OpenAI robotics leaving wasn't a good idea. It seems like it was but for other reasons.

Re: OpenAI disbands its robotics research team

#84

Post by modeless »

joe_the_user wrote: post #83
modeless wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can waldo any number of commercially available arms to do work humans do today Not for everyday tasks with anywhere near the efficiency, reliability, speed, and cost that humans have without robots. You can't waldo any robot to do the laundry or the cooking in a normal home anywhere near as well as a human can do it. (I'd love to see you try!) Sure, you can make a robot that can do work humans can't. You can make…

Even if this is true, that weakens your point that hardware is the fundamental limit for robots. If there are situations where software giving human like behavior to a robot could be extremely valuable, then there's certainly a motivation for generic AI companies to be in that area. That doesn't mean OpenAI robotics leaving wasn't a good idea. It seems like it was but for other reasons.

Giving robots human-like behavior is mostly useful for general-purpose robots. Specialized robots don't need general AI to do their jobs. OpenAI is trying to develop general human-like AI. There's no general-purpose robot for them to put it in, and developing one is a hardware problem, not a software problem.

Re: OpenAI disbands its robotics research team

#85

Post by roombad »

modeless wrote: post #68

I think most people believe that the problem with robots is that we don't have the right software, and if we just knew how to program them then today's robots could be incredibly useful in everyday life. From that perspective, this move from OpenAI seems dumb. That belief is wrong. Today's robots can't be made useful in everyday life no matter how advanced the software. The hardware is too inflexible, too unreliable,…

I don't think it's really true to say that the issue is hardware or software. There is lots of robotics in everyday life, from autonomous vacuums in our homes to autonomous factories producing the goods we consume. The reason we don't have millions of little robots buzzing around us is... there's very little need for it.

The average human spends most of their time barely engaged, our brains and bodies are operating far below what we're capable of, the romanticised sci-fi vision of a world filled with intelligent robots performing every menial task for humans builds on the idea that humans have better things to do, but do we? We already have enough knowledge and resources to end world hunger, to bring a high standard of living to every human, but we choose not to: our problem is social, not software or hardware.

As an aside, I'd dispute the claim that hardware is lagging behind software: Tesla has lots of money and lots of smart people and they haven't been able to deliver self driving cars after more than a decade of promises (because of software).

Re: OpenAI disbands its robotics research team

#86

Post by taneq »

modeless wrote: post #68

I think most people believe that the problem with robots is that we don't have the right software, and if we just knew how to program them then today's robots could be incredibly useful in everyday life. From that perspective, this move from OpenAI seems dumb. That belief is wrong. Today's robots can't be made useful in everyday life no matter how advanced the software. The hardware is too inflexible, too unreliable,…

> Today's robots can't be made useful in everyday life no matter how advanced the software. The hardware is too inflexible, too unreliable, too fragile, too rigid, too heavy, too dangerous, too expensive, too slow.

You're absolutely wrong. Anyone with basic electronics knowledge and a few hundred bucks can build a passable robot body out of hobby grade servos and 3D printed parts. If you're willing to spend $10k+ you can make something quite capable.

Programming it to then actually do anything, let alone anything useful in the real world, is still out of reach for all but a tiny fraction of companies.

Hardware still has a long way to go before it's as capable as biological systems but it's usable. Real world AI is far from that in most areas.

Re: OpenAI disbands its robotics research team

#87

Post by taneq »

minimaxir wrote: post #4

The cynical-but-likely-accurate take is that researching language modeling has a higher ROI and lower risk than researching robotics.

Yep. Hardware is hard and expensive. The real world is messy and complicated. Focusing on information wrangling currently has a much higher payoff.

Re: OpenAI disbands its robotics research team

#88

Post by taneq »

wolverine876 wrote: post #75
Animats wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. Also, regular ML researchers sit at tables with laptops. Robotics people need electronics labs and electronics technicians, machine shops and machinists, test tracks and test track staff... If you have to build stuff, and you're not in a place that builds stuff on a regular basis, it takes way too long to get stuff built.

> If you have to build stuff, and you're not in a place that builds stuff on a regular basis, it takes way too long to get stuff built. I wonder why they don't invest in establishing the competency for robotics. The potential return might seem enormous, though their choices might signify that they don't agree. Or maybe they just aren't willing to leave their comfort zone. 'Software will eat the world' is a convenient…

It's just higher risk and lower bang for buck right now.

Re: OpenAI disbands its robotics research team

#89

Post by ofrzeta »

Animats wrote: post #64
nradov wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We are decades away from being able to build a general bipedal robot that can snake out a plugged toilet or dig a trench or nail shingles to a roof. It's just not a rational goal yet. Aim lower.

And we're further away since nobody bought Schaft from Google, and Schaft was shut down. They had the best humanoid. But so many of the little problems have been solved. Batteries are much better. Radio data links are totally solved. Cameras are small and cheap. 3-phase brushless motors are small and somewhat. Power electronics for 3-phase brushless motors is cheap. 3D printing for making parts is cheap. I used to wo…

Where can you get a good legged dog-type robot for US$12K? Because Spot is much more expensive..

Re: OpenAI disbands its robotics research team

#90

Post by Animats »

ofrzeta wrote: post #89
Animats wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And we're further away since nobody bought Schaft from Google, and Schaft was shut down. They had the best humanoid. But so many of the little problems have been solved. Batteries are much better. Radio data links are totally solved. Cameras are small and cheap. 3-phase brushless motors are small and somewhat. Power electronics for 3-phase brushless motors is cheap. 3D printing for making parts is cheap. I used to wo…

Where can you get a good legged dog-type robot for US$12K? Because Spot is much more expensive..

Unitree A1
Post reply on HN