4 ms·
The problem with Boston Dynamic's robots imo isn't the cost versus a human but the cost versus a simpler and cheaper yet just as capable (if not more capable) w
by dd_roger 6y ago
The problem with Boston Dynamic's robots imo isn't the cost versus a human but the cost versus a simpler and cheaper yet just as capable (if not more capable) wheeled robot.
I have a very hard time coming up with applications where the walking capability is useful. On the other hand the space wasted to put all this technology could be used for more batteries, a sturdier body to carry heaviers weights, etc.
- jsmith45 6y agoThe advantage of legs is for use in environments set up for humans with working legs. Things like a normal flight of stairs, walking over a moderate sized gap in the floor, etc. Those sorts of things can be a real pain for wheeled robots (things like stair climbing wheel assemblies, and just larger wheels can overcome some of these, but have their own downsides), while spot has no issues handling them. If you can design the environment to fit the needs of the robots, then sure wheeled or even on-rails will likely be a better choice (less expensive, greater load, etc) But for retrofitting robots into existing environments without totally reconfiguring them legs can be rather useful. The question is are there enough such circumstances that Boston Dynamics can actually make reasonable amounts of money? I'm not sure. It is possible there are some fields with a lot of killer applications for such robots, but few spring to mind.