3 ms·

a bullet is faster than any car. the point is, it's a humanoid type robot, not just a faster vehicle.

shevy-java 2mo ago
Why would you call it "humanoid"? Can you qualify this? Because I came to the conclusion that this is NOT a humanoid robot. Having one rectangle and four long spear-like things, does not make something "humanoid". So which criteria do you use?
- nom 2mo ago
  it is of humanoid shape
- phoghed 2mo ago
  Per the article > Lightning the humanoid robot clocks 9.32sec in Beijing Bipedal, hips, knees, feet. Looks humanoid to me. If cloudflare puts this in a grid of images and asks me to pick the humanoids, I’m clicking it
  - paulpauper 2mo ago
    yea people will look for any reason to disagree. It's right in the article.
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
- petcat 2mo ago
  I think of "humanoid" as a machine capable of operating in the same complex physical environment as humans do. For instance, it is generally more comfortable for a healthy adult human to use a steep staircase than a steep ramp. So a "humanoid" robot would be capable of using the same staircase instead of requiring a ramp to be purpose-built just for it.
qayxc 2mo ago
I don't see the difference. Is a humanoid robot not a machine? What surprises is that it took so long to achieve this. It took Honda 20 years to get to ASIMO in 2000. I'm not surprised by the fact that 26(!) years later, a humanoid robot finally exceeds human capabilities in basic tasks like running. Such robot would easily smash the current marathon record as well and the only thing I'd be impressed by, would be the battery capacity tbh.
- paulpauper 2mo ago
  What people find impressive or interesting is subjective, I guess.
  - qayxc 2mo ago
    Absolutely. I was impressed by ASIMO and Atlas. Running fast, though, doesn't seem all that impressive by comparison, but yeah YMMV.
    - hakfoo 2mo ago
      It's a very pretty benchmark. Everyone has the same basic objective and measurement norm, so we can see how performance improves year over year, and how different manufacturers handle a specific known goal, even if it's not super-representative of real world use cases. Billion-dollar supercomputers don't spend most of their time running LINPACK, and some probably perform better on specific tasks, but it doesn't make the Top 500 list any less of a thing.
- Cookingboy 2mo ago
  But not all machines are the same? If you were ever trapped on the top floor of a burning building, should we just send a car up there? Nobody is surprised by advancement like this, but there is still a lot of engineering that went into it, not talking about how it’s now almost consumer grade tech that you can buy.
  - qayxc 2mo ago

Why would you call it "humanoid"? Can you qualify this? Because I came to the conclusion that this is NOT a humanoid robot. Having one rectangle and four long spear-like things, does not make something "humanoid". So which criteria do you use?

nom 2mo ago
it is of humanoid shape
phoghed 2mo ago
Per the article > Lightning the humanoid robot clocks 9.32sec in Beijing Bipedal, hips, knees, feet. Looks humanoid to me. If cloudflare puts this in a grid of images and asks me to pick the humanoids, I’m clicking it
- paulpauper 2mo ago
  yea people will look for any reason to disagree. It's right in the article.
deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]
petcat 2mo ago
I think of "humanoid" as a machine capable of operating in the same complex physical environment as humans do. For instance, it is generally more comfortable for a healthy adult human to use a steep staircase than a steep ramp. So a "humanoid" robot would be capable of using the same staircase instead of requiring a ramp to be purpose-built just for it.

qayxc 2mo ago

I don't see the difference. Is a humanoid robot not a machine? What surprises is that it took so long to achieve this. It took Honda 20 years to get to ASIMO in 2000. I'm not surprised by the fact that 26(!) years later, a humanoid robot finally exceeds human capabilities in basic tasks like running. Such robot would easily smash the current marathon record as well and the only thing I'd be impressed by, would be the battery capacity tbh.

paulpauper 2mo ago
What people find impressive or interesting is subjective, I guess.
- qayxc 2mo ago
  Absolutely. I was impressed by ASIMO and Atlas. Running fast, though, doesn't seem all that impressive by comparison, but yeah YMMV.
  - hakfoo 2mo ago
    It's a very pretty benchmark. Everyone has the same basic objective and measurement norm, so we can see how performance improves year over year, and how different manufacturers handle a specific known goal, even if it's not super-representative of real world use cases. Billion-dollar supercomputers don't spend most of their time running LINPACK, and some probably perform better on specific tasks, but it doesn't make the Top 500 list any less of a thing.
Cookingboy 2mo ago
But not all machines are the same? If you were ever trapped on the top floor of a burning building, should we just send a car up there? Nobody is surprised by advancement like this, but there is still a lot of engineering that went into it, not talking about how it’s now almost consumer grade tech that you can buy.
- qayxc 2mo ago