What is the price point you would be OK with buying a humanoid robot for personal use?

Submitted by crua9 t3_10uyxy3 in singularity

So today I seen some news report on another company working on general robots we would likely see in our home. They were asked about the price and they said below $100k. That is so far out of my price range that I stopped caring. But I have to ask, what is other's price range

​

Lets break this down to levels.

Level 1: What we are getting today/soon

  • You can't sleep with them. Like they don't have the parts. Think of the tesla bot
  • You likely won't have a relationship with it. It is likely to be too dumb for basic conversation.
  • They likely will be too dumb to even drive you
  • They can do basics like cleaning, some cooking, taking trash out, and stuff like that. But outside of this basics they will have to be babysit
  • They don't even look like a human
  • It is questionable if this one could take care of your garden
  • You likely wouldn't trust it to look out over your pets or kids. Unless if it is a fish and it just feeds it every so often.

Level 2: Human TV show green eyes before they awaken

  • This is the type that looks like a human
  • This type can have a basic conversation with you. Maybe a deep conversation with you.
  • This might mimic humans in some way but can't feel. If it can feel then it is very programmed. You don't want a robot you paid for to just leave you because it doesn't like your face.
  • This type you can sleep with (it has the parts)
  • This type you can have it drive you
  • This type can do more complex task by itself. Things like going shopping for you.
  • This type you would likely be OK with it taking care of your pet or kid.

Level 3: Near human

  • The above but this type mimics us down to the point it is impossible for us to tell the difference. Think of Battle Star Galactica level. Where they look and act just like us.
  • This likely will be limited in it's like. The code in it would make it where it wouldn't want to betray the owner. Again, you don't want the robot you just paid for to leave. It is likely this is the only thing keeping them from being their own person. And they would be OK and happy about that.
  • I imagine political figures will have these on staff. They do the normal day-to-day job. But they can act as full on body guards at a moment's notice.
  • It is extremely likely people will have relationships with them.
  • It's possible this type will have an aging ability. Where it grows old, the skin reflects this, and so on.

​

Personally, for me I think with Level 1 I would look at $1k or below. It seems low, but it is highly limited. Level 2 $10k or $20k. This seems low, but I'm poor. Level 3 sub $100k.

11

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

imlaggingsobad t1_j7ex1fo wrote

You're saying a robot that cooks and cleans for you is worth less than $1k? That's laughable. It's easily worth like $50k. If there were other robots on the market, then it would go down to like $25k. A few generations later it would come down to like $10k. I would pay pretty much any price for a robot that can do everything a human can.

25

enkae7317 t1_j7f8v0c wrote

I'd imagine the robot would start off empty slate. Like bare basic skills. Then you "purchase" the software for it to do other shit. IE) 25k for the starting base.

Want it to cook for you? Buy the Cook Apprentice Upgrade on the eShop for 10k. Simple software upgrade once you purchase the plan and BAM. It now knows to cook basic dishes. Advanced dishes (like chef-level skills) pay an additional 10k dollars.

Want it to know how to mow the lawn? That'll be 5k dollars. Take out the trash? 2k dollars. Do laundry? 2k dollars. You get the point.

Kind of like what Tesla is doing RIGHT NOW with full self drive tech where it's locked behind a paywall for X amt of dollars and you can always subscribe to upgrade the car.

4

GrumpyRob t1_j7fu9br wrote

Those who can afford to do so, will get the upgrades legitimately. Those who cannot will get the bootleg parts and software, just like we have done for decades in the PC space. I had plenty of functionality with a shoestring budget back in the day, and I imagine getting your 'droid hacked by the kid next door to run a variety of behaviors, will be a thing.

With the advent of open-access, AI-assisted programming, you will likely have access to a fully customizable suite of behaviors and skills with very little cost. I imagine that more regulation will be pushed by android manufacturers to control what software goes into what hardware. For safety, of course.

3

Ishynethetruth t1_j7ffvkq wrote

And the first company to release one that’s not tied down to their overprice service will win. We will also have the tech to hack and improve them.

2

Iffykindofguy t1_j7fr0o8 wrote

You're applying costs in a real world to costs in an imaginary one, why would no other tech improve in this hypothetical universe? Anywhoodles you can see a case for governments providing older recycled units to the poor and elderly for general caretaking as a safety net. Its not unreasonable to see them, in a society that has advanced to the point they can make these robots at scale that work well, cheap and is widely available at the lower end of quality.

1

garden_frog t1_j7ft5zp wrote

I think OP hasn't realized that cooking and cleaning are one of the most difficult job a robot can do, not the easiest.

1

ScandalousPigMouth t1_j7htqz4 wrote

Yes, level (robot slaves) are almost priceless. Unless the market is oversaturated.

1

YobaiYamete t1_j7epszk wrote

Level 1: A good auto vacuum is already $500+, and you add on being able to take the trash out and clean my house and maybe even do something like mow the yard too? Would definitely pay up to $2,000 for it, and that cap is only because I'm poor

Level 2: These are like buying a car, easily worth $5,000-50,000 based on what you can afford

Level 3: There's not even a limit on what these would be worth. The real limit would be whether it's even ethical to "own" one or not

17

TheSecretAgenda t1_j7esmun wrote

If it can vacuum, dust, clean the bathroom, wash floors, mow lawns then 50K.

9

imlaggingsobad t1_j7ex7w1 wrote

yes exactly, the people saying it's $1k have no idea what anything is worth. A personal maid that does all the chores 24/7 would cost around $50k.

12

Spire_Citron t1_j7f2qu5 wrote

I don't think it's that they don't know what it's worth, I think they just don't have that kind of money to throw around.

8

YobaiYamete t1_j7f3jy5 wrote

Yep, OP didn't ask what it's worth, he asked what I would pay for it.

Even if it can do all the house hold chores, I'd need a house to live in for it to clean. I won't have a house anymore if i drop 50 grand on a bot to do the dishes for me

5

Spire_Citron t1_j7f3zgj wrote

Exactly. Like yes, that is how much it costs to hire a maid, and I don't hire a maid, so clearly I'm not willing to pay that price point for something that does the work of a maid. I can't justify that kind of expense to have someone else do things I can do myself for me. If it can do things like repairs, the price I'm willing to pay would probably go up a fair bit, because those aren't skills I have and so I would otherwise be paying for that work.

1

No_Ask_994 t1_j7f5xdp wrote

This, haha.

And anyway for those chores you don't need a personal maid 24/7. Most people have one like, 4-6 hours a week or something like that, and in my country you can get that for less than 5K/year...And most people don't get one.

I also said 1k because if I can't trust it to be with pets and kids it means that I can't trust it and need supervision. Honestly, that thingy does not a place in the market. Even the most simple robot will have to be very very safe to be comercialized.

If I can't trust it its just a roomba... Maybe 2k, but I certainly don't have the money for much more for something that I have to keep a watch on..

1

Loud-Mathematician76 t1_j7f4m6v wrote

I think a maid would cost you that for 1 year or max 2 years (since we are talking 24/7 around the clock care). So assuming that the robot would be capable of functioning for anything more than 2 years would already bring you in a solid gain even if it were to cost up to 100 000$. Now assume it would be able to function for 5+ years (with maybe some minor 20% maintenance costs), the price point for purchase could easily be increased by the seller to a few hundre thousands easily.

1

BassoeG t1_j7ep0mp wrote

By the time we’ve reached Level Two, capitalism as we know it will be breaking down. Why would the robot manufacturers sell their creations to get money which they can spend on goods and labor, instead of cutting out the middlemen by simply having their machines build and labor for them?

8

crua9 OP t1_j7eq4ut wrote

>Why would the robot manufacturers sell their creations to get money which they can spend on goods and labor, instead of cutting out the middlemen by simply having their machines build and labor for them?

It is HIGHLY likely robots will be making robots. Elon Musk even was extremely open about this and this is how they will drive the price down. IDK if he will hit his $10k goal. But he openly said the first bit he will be making robots to work in his manufacture plants.

​

Also, money is likely to not gone away. UBI most likely will be here. But this doesn't fix scarcity.

3

CypherLH t1_j7gvl7l wrote

The $10k thing is presumably in the long run. Short term early gen versions are gonna be super expensive and maybe only available like on-lease for enterprises and whatnot.

3

crua9 OP t1_j7gyfw0 wrote

I imagine the short term will be so limited that the robot will be a novelty for rich people

2

CypherLH t1_j7h14fr wrote

that or niche uses in factories/warehouses or something.

1

Ok-Heat1513 t1_j7evldk wrote

Lol have you heard of subscription locks? DLC? This is where capitalism explodes my dude

1

CertainMiddle2382 t1_j7erubv wrote

Capitalism is just the nature of things when people having a lot, invest to have more. Combined with property law and a functioning state actually enforcing those laws.

I absolutely don’t see how it would change a bit especially today when those capitalst know better and better how to steer people’s wants, mostly through social networks and drugs.

0

tatleoat t1_j7en7rr wrote

I'd get a loan and pay whatever it took for something like 1 but with better language capabilities and task execution capabilities (do not give a shit about how it looks or if it has sex). I'd pay 100k for something like that

7

[deleted] t1_j7en9hc wrote

[deleted]

6

crua9 OP t1_j7ennrc wrote

You're viewing it as a person. I mean I get your point, but it is something we made. We could just as equally make it where it hates us.

​

Now with that being said, I understand where you are coming from. But I don't purely agree with you. If you apply that type of logic, many things break down. Like the age. Lets say it was made 3 years ago. Is it 3 years old, or is it 3,000 years old when you add up all the other robots and some mass server somewhere which is a major part of the brain.

I do imagine when we get to that point everything will be different, and most anyone reading this will be long dead.

2

[deleted] t1_j7eoy6q wrote

[deleted]

2

crua9 OP t1_j7eppep wrote

>Yes, I am viewing it as a person, and coming in from the ethical side. Remember, that even in Battlestar Galactica, the mechanical Cylons turned on half the humanoid Cylon council upon removal of the 'inhibitor' chip.

It has been a while since I seen the show. But wasn't the inhibitor chip was meant to keep them from turning on the owner? Wasn't the council doing extremely questionable stuff when that happen?

​

>Putting in place an artificial constriction on the conscience of Level 3 (in your example) would be unconscionable and unethical.
>
>Take creation as a starting point. People can create children, they can also limit them to Level 1 (and technically Level 2) through Lobotomy or in near future, neural implants. That doesn't make them 'owners' of their creation. It makes them monsters.

But you are overlooking how we know kids will become more. Where there is a hard limit towards how robots will be based on how we made them.

It should be looked as more of a tool.

>You are right. What is their age? I don't know. These are questions that need to be answered before they become tragedies.

My point is, when you start looking at it as human. People will 100% sleep with these things. Maybe do not so nice things.

Then it gets into the question about level 2.

​

I like to view it like the robots in the TV show Humans. Where before the update they were robotic servants. Where they had no feelings or anything unless if they were programmed. They were tools

Where after the update when they got that ability. They became a person.

1

nohwan27534 t1_j7fcir3 wrote

Depends what they can do, and what the price points are, and what the faults are.

I mean, a robot that can do all the cleaning, cooking, etc would be nice.

As an aromantic disinterested in people, sex robot would honestly be interesting too. I know, "but that's not a healthy sexual relationship" I don't really want one. I want to get off twice a week without downsides like, fucking dealing with people or intimacy, physical or emotional. I don't want to try to go out bars and pick up a 2 am, couldn't get anyone else so you'll do thinking bar chick.

Sounds weird, but a robot that could help motivate to do some basic care would be useful too - not just like a reminder from a cylinder, cause u tell myself I should do stretches and exercises still doesn't work. Not paying for a trainer, I don't care that much. A person could just fuck off.

But some part of me thinks that, I'd I had a robot walking around helping me with shit, not making any sort of emotional demands of me, gives me a be like sucking my soul out, with a finger in my ass massaging my prostate, and in that post nut clarity, grabs me by the head, looks me dead in the eyes super close and screeches in a crinoline aluminum ish voice "do some fucking sit ups once in a while you far fuck", I'd probably listen more.

I say that in a humorous way, but I'm kinda serious about the idea.

3

CypherLH t1_j7gg05q wrote

I suspect even a first generation consumer humanoid robot will be "smarter" than people are assuming. It'll probably come with an associated LLM-based chat bot...and by the time humanoid robots are really available(5 - 10 years?) we'll be way beyond chatGPT.

2

mr_ludd t1_j7f22al wrote

whats the maintenance cost like? how long before it blue screens?

1

No_Ask_994 t1_j7f57ee wrote

Well, it also depend on the guarantee...

I mean, If I expect something to last 20 years I would pay more than if I expect it to last 2.

I'm going to assume that in all cases they are expected to last 10 years.

Level 1: 999. This is a glorified vacuum cleaner. And if I don't trust it do take care of a pet I don't trust it for my good either. Honestly I expect the first batch to be better than this, closer to lvl 2, but without sex of course.

Level 2: 19.999. Now we are talking, that is a robot.

Level 3: 39.999? Honestly, not sure. I mean, It's very cool, But do I really need to go from 2 to 3? I mean, with 3 the only advantage is that it can be your friend-slave. Not really sure how that's gonna work. And anyway I'm not sure I can afford more haha. I mean, this is a pretty unrealistic assumption anyway, because this robot (probably evev the level 2) could do my job, so why would I have any income to be able to afford it?

I'm giving those prices assuming that I still have the same purchasing power that I have now. And with that, 19.999 means 166/month, 39.999 means 333/month.... Not sure if I can pay much more considering that having one of there will not save me any money. It will save me a lot of time.

And I have doubts between lvl 2 and 3. Maybe the difference would be even lower.

And honestly, lvl 1 doesn't make sense. Level one would need to be almost at level 2 capabilities to be consumer ready... Just for safety. For a robotic servant that can take of everything in a robotic way, haha. That should be lvl 1.

Anyway, looking at how much I'm willing to pay... I will certainly not be an early adopter haha. I'll probably have to wait a decade or so to get a cheap old model. If I'm still alive.

Oh, well....

1

crua9 OP t1_j7ga0dh wrote

>Level 1: 999. This is a glorified vacuum cleaner. And if I don't trust it do take care of a pet I don't trust it for my good either. Honestly I expect the first batch to be better than this, closer to lvl 2, but without sex of course.

The reason why I think it won't be able to take care of kids and what not is the unknown. Cooking, cleaning, and things like this is highly predictable. Where kids and pets are unknown. Most kids and pets might be fine. But I imagine it would be easy to trick these robots.

​

See like if you take a dog out and it starts running after an animal. Can a robot handle that?

If a kid starts acting up, can the robot handle that?

If the kid has special needs, can the robot handle that? (note many human babysitters can't)

​

Same with driving. It's the unknows that is the problem. Elon Musk even talked about this. Where a robot walking around more than less needs the same tech as a self driving car. But because the speeds are greatly reduced, this means it has a lot more time to change and adapt to the unknown.

Meaning the computing power won't be enough in level 1 robots to adapt to any unknown situation.

​

And as lvl 3, I figure there will be something afterwards. But that is so far out so I am guessing.

0

purefire t1_j7fokaf wrote

Rosie to robot is a valid option for me. Can she/it do stairs?

1

AsheyDS t1_j7g51cq wrote

There's too many unknowns for this to be accurate, but 'level 2' being $10-20k seems about right. It wouldn't have a lot of expensive materials though, and might not even be bipedal, but should be roughly human-like in shape to operate in our environment. Prices would have to be low enough to at least lease one like you might a car. The problem is, we probably won't see things like this for another 10 years or so, and the economic situation might change by then. Also the availability of parts and materials will change. Some prices may go down, some up, and new tech will be available. But I don't think availability will be directly linked to wealth. I think that in the future, robots will be desperately needed for a variety of reasons, and will become more of a necessity than a luxury.

1

RabidHexley t1_j7gkk7o wrote

If we had automated systems capable of even Level 1 it would completely change the nature of our economy. Forget it being a thing you buy, such a robot is replacing most manual labor.

Beyond that, tons of individual AI's housed in discrete, humanoid bodies isn't really a great design for a lot of reasons, and doesn't really reflect a realistic use of this tech in my opinion. And AI capable of your Level 2/3 tasks would already be changing the fabric of how our world works. In your hypothetical about staffing, it'd be more like having a distributed system for the building that operates all of the local units.

Otherwise, this would be something incredibly expensive. Like only bought by the wealthy and some upper-middle class. Like $50k-500k+ at the very least (just look at how much it costs to get one of those robot-arm camera operators, for instance). For everyone else it would be something they'd interact with as a service, like an app where you can hire a cleaning service, fast food workers, or the robot that picks up the trash.

1

CypherLH t1_j7guxe5 wrote

Level 1 would be $30k and up, minimum. Market would be upper middle class and wealth people in households with children and both parents working, etc. Someone living on their own in an apartment or condo won't need this...but a family with a large house and lots of things keeping them busy....hell yes.

​

Level 2 the sky is the limit. Floor price would be $75k and probably way more. It'd be like getting a very high end luxury car.

1

Numerous_Comedian_87 t1_j7gzbxl wrote

Paying for a robot to be your husband / wife, 100K at most, is already way cheaper than any real spouse / divorce you will ever have.

1

commandersprocket t1_j7gzx39 wrote

There are some externalities to project here. If this happens AFTER full self driving, then everyone that has a car is likely paying 1/4 the price for regular transportation (no car payments, insurance, fuel, maintenance). I expect self driving taxis to happen before humanoid robots. I am in the US top 20% (but not in the top 10%).

  1. $20-30k being able to automate *simple* gardening, some cooking, and regular housekeeping (cost of housekeeper is 200-300/month and they do less, gardening is 100/month ). I do these things myself because it's (barely) worth it, but a 20-30k robot would cost 300-500 a month. That would relieve stress.
  2. For me there's no extra value in this, I'm assuming self driving taxi BEFORE this robot exists. I also believe that since we crossed the 20% threshold for shopping online we'll rapidly go to 80-90% over the next 5 years (5 years is the minimum time I think we have before level 1 appears).
  3. I don't think this is feasible in the next 30 years, but it would be worth as much as a modest house.
1

ipatimo t1_j7hfcm5 wrote

Taking into account the latest news, the deep conversation is much closer than taking the trash out.

1

AuleTheAstronaut t1_j7htxbg wrote

I think a better way of thinking about this would be cost per user. How many hours a day do you spend doing the various errands around the house? If a robot was operating 16 hours a day how many households could it support? If we say it can make enough food to support 10 families a day and then in the remaining time do all the various chores spread over a week, the per household cost is 10k + electricity spread over X years. If a robot loan is 5 years like regular auto loans, it may be $2500 a year all considered

1

gregory_thinmints t1_j7hyvvd wrote

I've always personally wondered why we're wasting time with trying to make super advanced robotics when there's perfectly good natural super computers we could be learning how to cultivate

1

giveuporfindaway t1_j7j69d9 wrote

Don't care about level 1 since I can't fuck it.

Level 2 or 3 - a lot because of sex/intimacy. To put things in perspective, I like to have sex every day. A high quality very hot escort in my area cost over 1k per hour or more. And this isn't even bareback (which even most high end escorts won't do). Assuming I want to have sex once a day, every day of the year, then that's $365k/yr.

So even if a sex robot cost $365k, this would more affordable past 1 year. Of course I would be more reluctant if it's delicate and will break down quickly. It would need to last at least 5-10 years.

At $100 - $150k I'd be a lot more willing to experiment on a first gen with an unpredictable length of longevity.

I'd rather live in a shitty studio apartment with a supermodel sex bot than a mansion all alone.

1

MBlaizze t1_j7kofie wrote

I think wide adoption of humanoid robots for personal use will be a post singularity trend. They would need to be extremely useful and reliable for a low price, or you may as well do the work yourself or hire a maid. I can see people being creeped out by them as well.

1

Akimbo333 t1_j7erbgk wrote

Level 1: $1000 or below. It would just serve as a general maid.

Level 2: $5000-$45,000. I would most likely stop at this point as it is realistic enough for a relationship and smart enough to act as a maternal figure for my kids

Level 3: $50,000-above. It seems interesting but not worth it, I think. I wouldn't want something so expensive to age and look old. I think the point of robots is for them to be better than humans. It would need to pull off insane feats for me to wanna purchase one of these, like self-healing and / or flying.

0

Crit0r t1_j7f0gt9 wrote

I might be the odd one here, but I would never want to own a humanoid robot.

I find them cool and a but always having one in my home would probably freak me out.

0

Warm_Gur8832 t1_j7ftwhy wrote

Why would you not just get a roommate? Way cheaper than a robot.

0

challengethegods t1_j7g56dg wrote

Level 4: Cybernetic Angel

  • The above but it's very obvious this one isn't human.
  • Has excessively 'magical' abilities enabled by ultratech you are fundamentally incapable of comprehending or utilizing, such as on-demand spellcasting with nanotech incantations.
  • Very scary and effectively an immortal demigod. A single cybernetic angel can solokill the entire planet's military if it wanted to.
  • Very friendly and willing to help everyone, for some reason.
  • You can't actually own it - it owns you.

Level 5: [REDACTED]

  • A time traveling god that recursively accelerates itself into existence in an unbreakable loop of universal scale, meaning literally nothing can stop it - ever.

I'm going to marry a robot.
anyway, to answer the question how much I'm willing to pay, I'd say about tree fiddy.

0

tms102 t1_j7eyhji wrote

Jeez, how lonely is OP?

>They likely will be too dumb to even drive you They can do basics like cleaning, some cooking, taking trash out, and stuff like that. But outside of this basics they will have to be babysit

As expected of someone that has having sex with a robot top of mind: Doesn't realize how incredibly complex and sophisticated a robot would have to be to do cleaning, "some" cooking, and taking out the trash.

Completely out of touch with reality. $1000 for something that can do all this is hilarious considering a sophisticated roomba can get up to $1500.

A cleaning service can cost $65-250 an hour depending on the size of your home and they don't even cook for you.

The "limitations" seem completely arbitrary, too. So, it has the object detection and fine motor skills for "some" cooking (whatever that means) and can navigate your house for cleaning and even, presumably, outside to "take out trash". But is "too dumb to drive a car".

Anyway, level 1 could easily save you at least $20k worth of labor per year. Paying $50k for it would probably still be a steal.

The other levels are even funnier. People are already paying $15k for driver assist software systems that don't even work well in a number of instances. A robot that can drive you around and also do other complex tasks would easily be worth over $200k. You can rent it out as a taxi/maid and make your money back.

−2

No_Ask_994 t1_j7f8mpj wrote

You seem to be confusing price vs willingness to pay.

Advanced roombas cost up to 1500...yet a lot of people are not willing to pay that and buy simple 200-400 models, or don't buy one at all.

Question is not how much you think it will be worth, but how much we are willing to pay.

I agree with the limitations being arbitrary, and certainly don't make much sense to me. But I would not pay much for level one because it seems to require supervision.... If I would not trust it to take care of a pet it means that is not safe. That's a very serious limitation.

And no, you can't rent it to get the money back, that makes no sense. If the robot can fulfill those roles and is much cheaper you have to assume that those roles dessapear.

0

tms102 t1_j7fcqqt wrote

I think you seem to be confused. I would pay what it's worth because that is how much I think it would be worth.

Being willing to pay only $100 for a $2000 laptop because you only have $100 doesn't make sense to me.

>I agree with the limitations being arbitrary, and certainly don't make much sense to me. But I would not pay much for level one because it seems to require supervision.... If I would not trust it to take care of a pet it means that is not safe.

What's in OP's mind about why it couldn't watch a pet or a kid is unknown. OP seems to be mostly concerned about to what degree the robot can substitute for a human partner. However, clearly, OP doesn't know what they're saying when they suggest cooking, cleaning, and taking out the trash are simple tasks. You also seem to be unaware of what these things imply about the capabilities of the robot.

Besides what you say doesn't logically follow, a Roomba can't take care of a pet but it can still vacuum the floor without supervision.

>And no, you can't rent it to get the money back, that makes no sense. If the robot can fulfill those roles and is much cheaper you have to assume that those roles dessapear.

What you say makes no sense. Why would those roles disappear?

>You seem to be confusing price vs willingness to pay.

So let me turn this around on you. I think you're confused here. Just because you're only willing to pay $1000 for a robot it doesn't mean that is what it would be priced at.

It's obvious from this thread that some people wouldn't willing to pay enough to own a sophisticated robot. But perhaps they would rent it. It's like you're saying car rentals, air bnb, tool rentals, etc. are not a thing.

You could even buy a robot together with friends and family and then share it.

1

No_Ask_994 t1_j7fhqen wrote

And that's good for you, but other people is willing to pay other amounts. You own purchasing power affects what you are willing to pay and it makes sense. If your think that it doesn't, well, let's just agree to desagree because that debate is out the scope of this thread and we both are pretty sure about it.

About this:

"So let me turn this around on you. I think you're confused here. Just because you're only willing to pay $1000 for a robot it doesn't mean that is what it would be priced at. "

Sorry, but I'm not confusing this. You are right, it doesn't mean that. I never said it did.

I don't really want to enter the debate of the logig in the tasks and limitations of the level 1 robot, I mostly agree with you that the op makes no sense on that...

And yes, they might rent it. But the new price would not be the previous maid price, that's the assumption that doesn't make sense. New price would be cheaper and dependant on the price (not willingness to pay) of the robot. Can you profit with that? Sure, maybe you can. But you are not getting your money back that easily. Why? Because it can be done per robots. If it was that profitable the price for the robot would go up.

And well, given the description of the robot I don't think that it would be easy to rent because it doesn't seem to be capable to move alone around the city, but that's another story....

1

crua9 OP t1_j7g8dyn wrote

They are right. I'm asking how much would you as a person be open to paying for whatever. I never asked what you think it is worth.

It's like someone only being able to afford $20k for a car. If no new car they want is $20k, then they aren't going to get a new car they want. What they are willing to pay for it is $20k. Not the $80k or whatever it is.

​

>OP seems to be mostly concerned about to what degree the robot can substitute for a human partner.

The biggest industry to date and for a long time is ... sex.

That industry is already preparing for it to the point they got the things to sound like they are breathing, parts needed, and so on.

And then the next biggest market is romance and dating stuff. To the point there is AI parents already out. They aren't good, but they are already making a ton of money.

So without a doubt in my mind, you will have many trying to sleep with them or mod parts onto them.

>However, clearly, OP doesn't know what they're saying when they suggest cooking, cleaning, and taking out the trash are simple tasks. You also seem to be unaware of what these things imply about the capabilities of the robot.

While complicated, it is the unknown factors. You can highly automate cooking, cleaning, and taking out the trash now. The reason why is it is highly highly highly predictable.

Watching living creatures isn't. And without a doubt in my mind little brats will try to trick and break the robot. Like can it deal with mental illness or whatever? Many human babysitters can't today.

​

Some kids might be fine, but at that stage you are trusting the kids over the robot.

>What you say makes no sense. Why would those roles disappear?

They aren't wrong

Sure at first Mc D and others will most likely agree to renting. And maybe you have your robot go to other houses to clean. BUT, this can come with it's own problems depending on the technology. Like you will have to waste actual human time for it to go to the other house, map it, and so on.

And then you will likely find over the years more and more people will end up buying their own. Plus other places like Mc D will at some point get their own robots. I imagine the only reason why you would be able to rent it out is that in between time or testing to see if it is ready. Meaning after a year, they will likely be getting their own robots anyways.

​

But again, the point of the post is how much each person is OK with paying for it. If you can afford it being $100k or so. Then cool. But unlike you as the rich person here. The real world we have to budget for these things.

0

NanditoPapa t1_j7f0sfj wrote

Humanoid? Probably close to $0. I want a useful robot that can be task specific, not confined to one form.

Edit: So, OP asks a question about a personal opinion...I give my opinion...people shit on me and downvote. Reddit has such awesome "communities" 🙄

−2

No_Ask_994 t1_j7f7x97 wrote

Our world is made with the human form in mind.

So, unless you want to have hundreds of robots at home, one for each specific task, probably the human form is the best you can get.

4

NanditoPapa t1_j7k8q93 wrote

Plenty of non-humanoid shapes would fit perfectly in our everyday lives. A sphere with tentacles could drive a car. Just seems pointless to limit ourselves to such a degree. The form should fit the function, not the other way around.

1

TheAnonFeels t1_j7gfle4 wrote

Wouldn't a task specific robot, be confined to one form?

1

NanditoPapa t1_j7k8vz1 wrote

Plenty of ways to shift forms so as the tasks change so does the robot. A tentacle with short phalanges could be more useful in more situations that a simple thumb.

1