pb_3 t1_ivf1e2v wrote
Any companies with a good product to gain exposure to?
Slightlydifficult t1_ivfalva wrote
So far Tesla is the only company I’ve seen with a prototype that looks feasible. Boston Dynamics can do some incredible things with robots but they have to program every movement and the videos we see often take many, many shots. Tesla also has a lot of vector mapping knowledge to borrow from the FSD team. A single model that can learn different tasks will be infinitely better than a wide array that needs very specific programming.
There will likely be many other companies attempting this in the near future so it’s tough to say but Tesla has a strong reputation for developing ground breaking technology. Don’t let Elon’s overestimated timelines fool you, Tesla’s AI team is one of the best in the world.
bpknyc t1_ivff5pf wrote
Yeah. Internet rando claims Tesla is the only feasible tech when the said Tesla tech are just bunch of vague claims with no significant substance makes sense
Tesla just laid off 200 Autopilot engineers earlier this year, and shifted another 50 to review Twitter code
Meanwhile, Ford/VW just dissolved their autonomous car venture Argo.AI because they didn't see a viable way to commercialize the tech in the near future.
All the signs point to the simple truth, that autonomous cars are still a long ways away, as well as "AI".
Slightlydifficult t1_ivfhj8r wrote
I completely agree that level 5 autonomy (and even level 4 most likely) are still a long ways off but level 3 is right around the corner. If they geofenced the current FSD Beta to avoid unprotected turns and thin roads, it would be 99% of the way there. The layoffs you’re referencing were actually a very positive sign that Tesla has made major advancements; the majority of those laid off were part of the data labeling team and Tesla was able to implement an autolabeling system that did their job with AI. I am very interested in the impact that moving 50 AP engineers to Twitter is going to have. It seems like an insanely dumb move to me but I have no idea what’s going on behind the scenes.
I hope autonomous vehicles are closer than you think! But technology rarely follows a linear path, all we can do is speculate and dream.
Test19s t1_ivfsot8 wrote
How likely is it that L4 either never rolls out within anyone’s lifetimes or is simply impossible to produce with inorganic computer chips?
Slightlydifficult t1_ivfyly4 wrote
That’s a really good question! It’s super hard to predict technology because advancements are rarely linear. We might find that the jump from 3 to 4 is relatively simple or maybe it takes decades of work before we can do it! I personally think that it’s likely to come very quickly, maybe even the next ten years.
Surprisingly, it doesn’t take a supercomputer to drive a car, I think the biggest limitation is not the chips but the sensors. For example, radar provides a good view of the world but stops working in rain or fog. Cameras are great until it hits inclement weather. LiDAR makes perfect 3d maps but it’s performance suffers at night or in cloudy weather.
Most companies are combining multiple sensors to combat their weaknesses but Tesla seems committed to using only cameras. I don’t know if multiple sensors will be required or if Tesla is right in trying to copy the way humans drive. So far, Tesla seems to have a lead but they’ve also spent more time working in this than anyone else. We’ll see if the camera only approach is enough for level 4, I’m a little skeptical.
Test19s t1_ivg2i5k wrote
I’m experiencing some pretty crazy stuff by decade’s end even if we don’t see mass L4 deployment. If radar and LiDAR become cheap enough we could see it even sooner. (I don’t see robotaxis working outside of major cities in certain countries bc a lot of people like their own cars)
Slightlydifficult t1_ivg6jfl wrote
It’s definitely a really cool time to be alive!
Test19s t1_ivgep7e wrote
If it wasn’t for all the other bullshit that came with being the decade that first built Optimus Prime.
bpknyc t1_ivfjcw3 wrote
Tesla can't even have full autonomous cars in a closed loop (Vegas loop) and requires human in the driver seat at all time ready to take over.
You realize that airport shuttles are fully autonomous, and doesn't require operators, right? He'll even Vegas monorail loop is driverless.
If Elon can't figure out 100% autonomous in a closed system when even Disney can put make their new star wars ride 100% autonomous in closed loop, you can know how far even level 3 is from viability.
Slightlydifficult t1_ivfkkqa wrote
You would be 100% correct if Tesla was attempting autonomous driving in the traditional way with mapping and specific route planning. But Tesla is not doing that at all, they actually have decreased the vehicles confidence in basic map data over the last few updates because they want the vehicle to process what it sees, not what it expects. This is why when they addressed Chuck Cook’s left turn it vastly improved unprotected turns for everyone, not just that one single instance. For that same reason, a closed loop isn’t a great way to measure the vehicle’s performance because they’re not training it for any specific routes. It makes their progress look much slower but in the end it will be able to adapt to changing road conditions, construction, new roads, etc. without needing to be pre-mapped. That said, I don’t think we’ll be seeing level 5 without different camera placement, I’ll be curious to see if HW4 makes that change.
bpknyc t1_ivfzor8 wrote
Lol you keep slurping up tesla marketing gimmick without any critical thinking.
Have you seen Capchas that ask you to identify motorcycles or traffic lights? Why do you think hundreds of millions of people are being turned into mechanical turks in 2022 for the sake of "account security?".
Capchas can determine if you're a human or a bot by the way a mouse moves within fractions of a second of the pages loading. Been that way since mid 2010s. The reason is because even the latest gen image recognition isn't very good at these things.
Teslas been promising fully autonomous car next year for almost a decade now. Maybe you should try to ask "why would it be different" or at least read the story of the boy who cried wolf
Imaginaryp13 t1_ivg4y2k wrote
Don't forget Agility Robotics, digit just got hands to do more things, by far the best legged humanoid, that's scalable. Only 2 atlas's exist, while tons of digits exist.
Slightlydifficult t1_ivg6rlq wrote
I don’t know of them, I’ll look it up! EVs allowed new companies to enter an old market, I bet robotics will be the same!
Feuerphoenix t1_ivfewhe wrote
Feasible? This robot is so far from being feasible as an Iron bar is from becoming a carframe. We did not see any active interactions on stage, no walking, nothing advanced at all. Boston dynamics is a lot more advanced in that regard. Even the show case videos are heavily edited. Sorry I don‘t see this as being close, and Musk himself is…let‘s say very liberal with self set deadlines. I am willing to wait until the next presentation, but as of right now, what was shown is neither special, nor advanced or intelligent.
Slightlydifficult t1_ivfi97j wrote
I have to disagree! The robot we saw was slapped together in less than a year, that’s massive progress already! But the construction of the robot isn’t why I think it’s feasible, it’s the approach.
For a long time we’ve made very specific robots with very specific tasks. They cost a fortune but they do their job well. Tesla is going a different direction and saying “why make a specific robot when we can make a general one?” Optimus wouldn’t even require changes to the factory floor because it’s designed to mimic human movements. They’ll be able to mass produce it, equipment it with software that allows it to visualize its environment, and train it to do a wide array of human tasks.
I do like the comparison of an iron bar to a car frame because it’s a long ways off still but the bones are there and the approach seems right to me. Boston Dynamics knows how to make a robot but they don’t know how to make a robot that understands and interacts with its environment. That is going to be absolutely essential for any sort of mass production of humanoid robots.
BMW_wulfi t1_ivfkekj wrote
When they fix everyone’s (tesla owners) auto wipers, I’ll believe you. Until then, you’re just spouting an unfounded opinion.
Slightlydifficult t1_ivfvtk6 wrote
They are fixed on FSD beta, same as the auto headlights. I imagine you’ll see that roll out when they make everything single stack, I suspect that will be the Christmas update but who knows.
fwubglubbel t1_ivg5wti wrote
You should look up a robot named Baxter.
Slightlydifficult t1_ivg7r4o wrote
I remember Baxter! I haven’t seen anything on that in years, I’ll have to see what that company is up to because Baxter is exactly the same idea as Optimus. I’m curious if they’ve already rolled out to manufacturers. I first remember hearing about Baxter like ten years ago, I’m sure they made plenty of improvements since I last saw it. They would actually have a massive lead time over Tesla, if they have the manufacturing process nailed down and could partner with a group like nvidia for AI, they could likely capture a big portion of that market years before Tesla has anything ready.
alphaxion t1_ivh5fst wrote
The robot they showcased was worse than tech from 15 years ago. Asimo was worlds ahead of what they had people awkwardly and manually walk onto the stage. It looked less advanced than an A100 audio-animatronic found in Disney rides (the model that was running the Wicked Witch in the Great Movie Ride), never mind the latest A1000 model seen here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qteMlMAaNM
A generalised robot will be even more expensive than a specialised one, because it is orders of magnitude more complex to do the things you're talking about.
Without putting huge amounts of R&D money into the product and a team of hundreds of engineers, I fully doubt they'll have anything by 2030 that is close to what Boston Dynamics have today.
Slightlydifficult t1_ivhafe7 wrote
Asimo was crazy for it’s time, it’s weird to think how long ago that was. The big difference is that asimo ran on preprogrammed maps while Tesla’s proposed bot will not need them. Asimo had some similar things with object detection but it was nowhere near as advanced as the occupancy network Tesla uses.
Generalized equipment is almost always cheaper to produce at scale. It’s certainly cheaper with a product like Optimus where the main selling point is the software. You don’t need multiple teams focusing on several different product lines. Maintenance is simplified and issues become much easier to identify and fix.
I think you should also consider that Optimus is running off of the same software as Tesla’s vehicles. They’ve already poured excessive amounts of money into R&D. They definitely need to have a crack team of engineers; like you’ve already noted, the actuation needs work. But even still, a functioning prototype put together in less than a year is absolutely wild for this level of robotics.
alphaxion t1_ivhm5md wrote
You're making a hell of a lot of assumptions, there. No-one has mass-produced any humanoid robot in decades of developing them.
There's also the major hurdle of how to power them. How long would a humanoid robot last on a charge? Will they be able to accomplish their tasks in the physical space they're looking to be operated within on that charge? Will the environment even be able to support something with the inevitably high weight they'll have?
The world we operate within is immensely complex, complete with people in it who are adversarial rather than compliant. The software for roads is proving a massive stumbling block already and that's semi-controlled. Hell, people have been discovering all sorts of issues with how those systems are sensing the world when they are adversarial to it, such as projecting different speed limits onto signs to trick the AI.
Free roaming in areas with squishy humans that don't have any of the safety features that modern cars have? I worry about our seeing the elderly crushed to death as someone with dementia freaks out in its company for the first time and knocks it over. Or where it cannot react in a quick enough time to the changing landscape of an industrial workplace and results in injury for the people still working there.
You're talking about this robot as if they've already got the solutions to fundamental aspects of both its design and its manufacturing sorted. It's not even a functioning prototype - it can't even walk unassisted. I'd also be extremely wary of claims made by Musk, the man who faked solar roof tiles for a demonstration.
I doubt a generalised (in function, that doesn't mean you can bolt together off the shelf components to manufacture it) humanoid robot will even be on the market by 2030. It's such a massively difficult task to accomplish, it takes humans near enough two decades before we consider them to be adults, and that's with millions of years of evolution behind us.
2050? That might be closer to the real timeframe when we can trust allowing these robots to walk amongst us.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments