4 ms·
Generally, humanoid robots are not preferable to other, purpose-built robots that (for example) you'll see on factory floors. Boston Dynamics already have adapt
by mossTechnician 2y ago
Generally, humanoid robots are not preferable to other, purpose-built robots that (for example) you'll see on factory floors. Boston Dynamics already have adaptable, quadrupedal robots that can be remotely deployed too.
The tasks Tesla suggested included babysitting, and now that we know that the robots are built for remote control first, I would feel pretty uncomfortable with letting my child alone in the same house with a robot like that. Vacuum cleaners are bad enough.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/ecovacs-robot-vacuums-hacked-slurs/ https://www.vice.com/en/article/ecovacs-robot-vacuums-hacked...
- schiffern 2y ago>remote control first If you mean 'first' in a literal chronological sense, sure. It's a logical R&D stepping stone. If you mean it's the typical operating mode for the final product, I doubt we can conclude that just from an early public tech demo.
- mossTechnician 2y agoTouche; I don't have a reason to think any finished product would be remote control first, but I would be shocked if the resulting robot wasn't bristling with cameras and network antennas. If hackers can yell slurs and record people through a robot vacuum, how much more could they do through a robot butler?
- jncfhnb 2y agoThat is because humanoid robots are general purpose forms, rather than purpose built forms. Factory robotics is mostly just conveyor belts and pusher whatevers. Not even something resembling a droid of any kind.