I wonder how true it is. Humanoid robots are popular in sci-fi because you can write lots of interesting stories with them, and it’s easy to film since you can just use a regular actor. But if I get to thinking what I’d want out of having one in the house, I’m drawing a blank. I’d rather they just made Roombas and dishwashers better.
Of course it’s fine to not want one, but I think there’s definitely a market for them in the home.
However, I think the “infinite demand” angle comes from industrial applications.
Evolution gave us a humanoid format because it’s the most functional. A roomba is the perfect format for cleaning the floor in your home, but a humanoid can collect ore out of the ground, build an oil rig, abduct humans, fight wars, all the things.
If productivity can be measured in gross domestic produce, then I guess the thinking is that humanoid robots will increase that, and if one human can supervise more than one bot then the math kinda points to infinite demand.
However, like most recent technological advances, I suspect that the beneficiaries of this tech will be few, and it will generally be us actual humans that will bear the cost. Imagine an army of canners stripping your country of rare earths to make batteries and whatever for more canners at the behest of a few billionaires.
Waiting for a working product is for losers… I guess?
Seriously though, I heard a sound bite of Musk talking about this. He perceives that there is unlimited demand for humanoid robots.
That being the case, you really want facilities ready to produce these canners the moment they’re invented.
Between now and the point at which they become viable, it’s just going to be idiots buying a google nest or alexa service with legs, basically.
I can see how it could kinda make sense if you’re a capitalist pig that has infinite money.
I wonder how true it is. Humanoid robots are popular in sci-fi because you can write lots of interesting stories with them, and it’s easy to film since you can just use a regular actor. But if I get to thinking what I’d want out of having one in the house, I’m drawing a blank. I’d rather they just made Roombas and dishwashers better.
LAZINESS!!!
That is biggest trend for Rich-Super Rich Economic Classes/Owners & the poorer other classes are trying save more time for them to live life.
Of course it’s fine to not want one, but I think there’s definitely a market for them in the home.
However, I think the “infinite demand” angle comes from industrial applications.
Evolution gave us a humanoid format because it’s the most functional. A roomba is the perfect format for cleaning the floor in your home, but a humanoid can collect ore out of the ground, build an oil rig, abduct humans, fight wars, all the things.
If productivity can be measured in gross domestic produce, then I guess the thinking is that humanoid robots will increase that, and if one human can supervise more than one bot then the math kinda points to infinite demand.
However, like most recent technological advances, I suspect that the beneficiaries of this tech will be few, and it will generally be us actual humans that will bear the cost. Imagine an army of canners stripping your country of rare earths to make batteries and whatever for more canners at the behest of a few billionaires.