• iegod@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      We interact with the world as humans, it stands to reason a general purpose humanoid robot would be capable of interacting in similar ways (or at least this should be the design goal). This immediately solves several issues. First, it gives us a baseline of understanding in terms of interactions and tasks. There’s no guessing how the device or interface should work. Second, it establishes general capabilities and limitations. There may be more efficient single purpose or limited designs for a subset of general tasks, but as a whole, a humanoid robot is the perfect general purpose approach.

      • vin@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Dude, humans are not perfect general purpose solutions. That’s why we use machines or animals. Also, I don’t get what you’re saying ‘baseline understanding of interactions and tasks’?

        • AlexLost@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          How are humans inefficient in design? We’ve managed to rule the planet with our design? Are you even human bro?!

          • vin@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            😆 so hard to know on lemmy who’s human

            To give examples of inefficiency - we have five fingers and surely one fewer makes no difference in capability, we have 2 legs whereas 4 will be more stable and faster, eyes can’t see in uv or ir.

            There are some things that don’t really effect robots but shows poor design like complexity of nose and throat being a choking hazard :D.

            Managing to be successful as a species is just evolutionary competence, which is a “random walk” through genetic changes that happened to create something better than others (not the best, just better than rest) for a larger set of environments

        • 1984@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          What should the robots look like then?

          It doesnt matter. This is the next step after Ai to get to dystopia. Cant stop the future.

    • 🍉 Albert 🍉@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      in theory, if they managed to get them to work properly, and we were to ignore the privacy issues (the lack thereof). a humanoid robot would be amazing and revolutionary.

      it isn’t just for chores though, once they are competent enough to perform productive labour it’ll replace most jobs.

      assume almost all human labour to be a thing of the past, and I doubt those tech rich would want to restructure society so we don’t end up like soylent green.

      • vin@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        Yes, it would be amazing and revolutionary. However, you achieve the same with other designs more economically.

        • 🍉 Albert 🍉@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          only capitalism can make a world, where labour is a thing is the past into a dystopia.

          Under capitalism, a post scarcity society would be hell on earth.