5 ms·

> But "useful humanoid robot" is way more forward-looking than anything else he's done this with Other aspirational goals he has set include a colony of a mill

> But "useful humanoid robot" is way more forward-looking than anything else he's done this with Other aspirational goals he has set include a colony of a million people on Mars and a neural lace. I think a humanoid robot is less ambitious than either of these two.

johnla 5y ago
I feel like with Tesla navigational brain technology, they can easily put together a bot that can mow lawns, sweep and mop floors. Pull out the garbage/bring cans back in. Security Sentry observe. Get mail. Walk dog. Deliver packages. I would pay for a bot that takes those chores off my hands.
hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
And, frankly speaking, it is a goal worth pursuing: not just per se, but for all technological advancements it would need to make in order to be successful.
marticode 5y ago
We already have the technology to send people to Mars. We sent people on round trips to the moon 50 years ago, so a one way ticket to Mars now isn't really that hard. What we don't have is cost effective technology to send enough people and equipment for a permanent colony there. But at this point it's really just working on getting cost down (which Musk has done beautifully so far), we have a pretty good idea of how we'll get there. On the other hand we just do not have the technology for a full humanoid robot, neither now nor the near future. An AI that can do mundane tasks like ironing and folding clothes is way beyond our grasp, and then there are the issue of limbs and power too.
- inglor_cz 5y ago
  "We sent people on round trips to the moon 50 years ago, so a one way ticket to Mars now isn't really that hard." IDK, man, life support systems for such a long trip are much more demanding than for a jaunt to Moon and back.
  - marticode 5y ago
    For sure, they need to last longer which means more supplies and more reliability. But we also got 50 years of progress since Apollo 11, and we wouldn't don't need to pack a return vehicle and its propellant.
- elurg 5y ago
  > We already have the technology to send people to Mars. Not for live humans we don't. The record for landing on Mars is around 1 ton for >$1B, this is too little for a crew cabin and ignores the life support requirement for months spend in space.

johnla 5y ago

I feel like with Tesla navigational brain technology, they can easily put together a bot that can mow lawns, sweep and mop floors. Pull out the garbage/bring cans back in. Security Sentry observe. Get mail. Walk dog. Deliver packages. I would pay for a bot that takes those chores off my hands.

hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago

And, frankly speaking, it is a goal worth pursuing: not just per se, but for all technological advancements it would need to make in order to be successful.

marticode 5y ago

We already have the technology to send people to Mars. We sent people on round trips to the moon 50 years ago, so a one way ticket to Mars now isn't really that hard. What we don't have is cost effective technology to send enough people and equipment for a permanent colony there. But at this point it's really just working on getting cost down (which Musk has done beautifully so far), we have a pretty good idea of how we'll get there. On the other hand we just do not have the technology for a full humanoid robot, neither now nor the near future. An AI that can do mundane tasks like ironing and folding clothes is way beyond our grasp, and then there are the issue of limbs and power too.

inglor_cz 5y ago
"We sent people on round trips to the moon 50 years ago, so a one way ticket to Mars now isn't really that hard." IDK, man, life support systems for such a long trip are much more demanding than for a jaunt to Moon and back.
- marticode 5y ago
  For sure, they need to last longer which means more supplies and more reliability. But we also got 50 years of progress since Apollo 11, and we wouldn't don't need to pack a return vehicle and its propellant.
elurg 5y ago
> We already have the technology to send people to Mars. Not for live humans we don't. The record for landing on Mars is around 1 ton for >$1B, this is too little for a crew cabin and ignores the life support requirement for months spend in space.