The robots are coming. Restructure the economy. Go. - The Bear and Badger

g.man

*Batteries Not Included

SpaceGazelle

monkey wrote:

But that's just tea.

Things will be designed with the bots in mind. A standard handle, a standard box type, much like a USB-C. Eventually it won't matter because all the bots will collectively learn all the things.

GooberTheHat

Skynet

SpaceGazelle

Standard nukes is a worrying thought.

monkey

SpaceGazelle wrote:

monkey wrote:

But that's just tea.

Things will be designed with the bots in mind. A standard handle, a standard box type, much like a USB-C. Eventually it won't matter because all the bots will collectively learn all the things.

But the cart won't go before the horse. They need to have reached a sufficient level of competence for "PG Tips - Now with Droid Friendly Packaging" to become a thing that shifts units of tea bags.

LivDiv

None of this sounds better.

monkey

I'm entirely down for completely standardised product packaging. But that's for environmental reasons.

SpaceGazelle

monkey wrote:

SpaceGazelle wrote:

monkey wrote:

But that's just tea.

Things will be designed with the bots in mind. A standard handle, a standard box type, much like a USB-C. Eventually it won't matter because all the bots will collectively learn all the things.

But the cart won't go before the horse. They need to have reached a sufficient level of competence for "PG Tips - Now with Droid Friendly Packaging" to become a thing that shifts units of tea bags.

It'll happen organically, possibly led by governments and built into law, just like the EU did with USB.

SpaceGazelle

LivDiv wrote:

None of this sounds better.

Yeah it won't be so nice for a while. Once the tech gets good we can all have our individual things again.

SpaceGazelle

People overlook that robots are going to get way better at seeing than just human eyes. You can have materials sensors, heat sensors, massively increased resolution and all sorts of stuff. We tend to think of bots trying to navigate with the same receptors we have.

bad_hair_day

LivDiv wrote:

@Hair
Why would we need a singular robot to do both those tasks?

You would only need one robot? Cheaper to manufacture at scale one form than many, so cheaper for the consumer.

monkey

SpaceGazelle wrote:

monkey wrote:

SpaceGazelle wrote:

monkey wrote:

But that's just tea.

Things will be designed with the bots in mind. A standard handle, a standard box type, much like a USB-C. Eventually it won't matter because all the bots will collectively learn all the things.

But the cart won't go before the horse. They need to have reached a sufficient level of competence for "PG Tips - Now with Droid Friendly Packaging" to become a thing that shifts units of tea bags.

It'll happen organically, possibly led by governments and built into law, just like the EU did with USB.

The phone thing? That was changing 3 connectors into 1 for one product. Not changing every piece of product packaging in the land. And it happened about fifteen years after that first became an issue for consumers.

LivDiv

bad_hair_day wrote:

LivDiv wrote:

@Hair Why would we need a singular robot to do both those tasks?

You would need one only robot? Cheaper to manufacture at scale one form than many, so cheaper for the consumer.

99% of the hardware wouldn't carry over though.
If you just want a self driving forklift and a robot lawnmower just have those things independently. Neither need especially complex computing power.

A lawnmower cant reach a 200kg pallet 12ft in the air no matter how smart it gets.

SpaceGazelle

@Monkey

You still seem unaware about how fast AI is going to take off, despite mentioning it yourself. The world is going to be a very different place in 10yrs.

monkey

And you're not taking on board that there are thousands of things that can act as brake on it.

bad_hair_day

LivDiv wrote:

bad_hair_day wrote:

LivDiv wrote:

@Hair Why would we need a singular robot to do both those tasks?

You would need one only robot? Cheaper to manufacture at scale one form than many, so cheaper for the consumer.

99% of the hardware wouldn't carry over though.
If you just want a self driving forklift and a robot lawnmower just have those things independently. Neither need especially complex computing power.

A lawnmower cant reach a 200kg pallet 12ft in the air no matter how smart it gets.

But a human shaped robot can push a lawnmower, get in a forklift truck and fold clothes. One robot to rule us all!

SpaceGazelle

LivDiv wrote:

bad_hair_day wrote:

LivDiv wrote:

@Hair Why would we need a singular robot to do both those tasks?

You would need one only robot? Cheaper to manufacture at scale one form than many, so cheaper for the consumer.

99% of the hardware wouldn't carry over though. If you just want a self driving forklift and a robot lawnmower just have those things independently. Neither need especially complex computing power. A lawnmower cant reach a 200kg pallet 12ft in the air no matter how smart it gets.

It could use a modular solution. Just some botstation it can go to and clip on what it needs. No problem to download the latest AI model for a specific task. When you need a really big task doing it'll be cheap to phone the big bots out to re-roof the house.

SpaceGazelle

monkey wrote:

And you're not taking on board that there are thousands of things that can act as brake on it.

Like what?

monkey

bad_hair_day wrote:

LivDiv wrote:

bad_hair_day wrote:

LivDiv wrote:

@Hair Why would we need a singular robot to do both those tasks?

You would need one only robot? Cheaper to manufacture at scale one form than many, so cheaper for the consumer.

99% of the hardware wouldn't carry over though. If you just want a self driving forklift and a robot lawnmower just have those things independently. Neither need especially complex computing power. A lawnmower cant reach a 200kg pallet 12ft in the air no matter how smart it gets.

But a human shaped robot can push a lawnmower, get in a forklift truck and fold clothes. One robot to rule us all!

If you're making the forklift and lawnmower anyway, isn't it more cost effective to have them operate autonomously instead of needing a third machine before they can do anything?

monkey

SpaceGazelle wrote:

And you're not taking on board that there are thousands of things that can act as brake on it.

Like what?

Things need laws. Laws take time and need public consent.

We've had this conversation before. It's like self-driving cars. It's one thing having the technology. It's another to have it ploughing around the place, round schools, making life and death choices, and have everyone on board with it.

LivDiv

Exactly that. Having all the guff to make it human compatible is unnecessary.
Both these things have already been solved anyway. No more development needed. Roombas dont have 4ft sticks coming out the top of them.

A modular thing where a human can take a thinking box off one and put it on another thing like drill batteries might be useful to save money but thats about the extent of it.

SpaceGazelle

They aren't going to legislate in countries like Russia in the same way we might, so we won't. It's an arms race for manufacturing, the economy, energy and well, arms.

monkey

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_food

SpaceGazelle

monkey wrote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_food

That's not an argument. For one you're presuming we can stop it, and I don't think that's possible.

SpaceGazelle

We could blow the Earth up I guess but we'll have to do it soon!

bad_hair_day

monkey wrote:

bad_hair_day wrote:

LivDiv wrote:

bad_hair_day wrote:

LivDiv wrote:

@Hair Why would we need a singular robot to do both those tasks?

You would need one only robot? Cheaper to manufacture at scale one form than many, so cheaper for the consumer.

99% of the hardware wouldn't carry over though. If you just want a self driving forklift and a robot lawnmower just have those things independently. Neither need especially complex computing power. A lawnmower cant reach a 200kg pallet 12ft in the air no matter how smart it gets.

But a human shaped robot can push a lawnmower, get in a forklift truck and fold clothes. One robot to rule us all!

If you're making the forklift and lawnmower anyway, isn't it more cost effective to have them operate autonomously instead of needing a third machine before they can do anything?

Depends if the said lawnmower can unlock, open and close the shed/side gate, traverse the steps and empty the clippings in the compost bin. Also it can use your grass master 4000 you can’t be arsed with pushing any more?

monkey

SpaceGazelle wrote:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_food

That's not an argument. For one you're presuming we can stop it, and I don't think that's possible.

It's an example of a technology that has got bogged down in legislation, restricted and that people are sceptical of. One of the reasons people distrust it is they don't trust companies to make safe decisions. And you can easily have made the arms race argument for that back in the 90s. I bet people did.

And you absolutely can stop AI. You ban it. It would work the same as digital piracy. You can't properly eliminate it but you can push it outside of mainstream commercial use. If Apple, Google and MS can't use it, they're going to make sure it's difficult for anyone else to.

monkey

bad_hair_day wrote:

monkey wrote:

bad_hair_day wrote:

LivDiv wrote:

bad_hair_day wrote:

LivDiv wrote:

@Hair Why would we need a singular robot to do both those tasks?

You would need one only robot? Cheaper to manufacture at scale one form than many, so cheaper for the consumer.

99% of the hardware wouldn't carry over though. If you just want a self driving forklift and a robot lawnmower just have those things independently. Neither need especially complex computing power. A lawnmower cant reach a 200kg pallet 12ft in the air no matter how smart it gets.

But a human shaped robot can push a lawnmower, get in a forklift truck and fold clothes. One robot to rule us all!

If you're making the forklift and lawnmower anyway, isn't it more cost effective to have them operate autonomously instead of needing a third machine before they can do anything?

Depends if the said lawnmower can unlock, open and close the shed/side gate, traverse the steps and empty the clippings in the compost bin. Also it can use your grass master 4000 you can’t be arsed with pushing any more?

Maybe it could. It wouldn't need to look like a normal lawnmower. It's probably not either / or. You could have a neighbourhood Lawn Drone. Pay a fiver a month and a little bot flies in, does your lawn and flies off to the dump with the trimmings. Or your General Purpose Butler could do it with your shitty old Flymo.

bad_hair_day

Can’t see it taking off.

SpaceGazelle

You can't ban AI unless all the countries ban AI. The countries that don't ban AI will be in a strong position to tell the other countries to fuck off. Google et al can't make it difficult for other companies to use it unless they use AI to try and accomplish that. They can try and limit the export of chips but anyone using AI to develop chips will soon get ahead of the companies not using AI to develop chips. It aint going to stop.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories