| This is just moving the goal post of your argument. But the "Hardware lags behind" only makes sense to Sci-fi like expectations of robot agility but the software isn't even remotely close to embody that hardware. Even In the real world robotics applications TODAY this statement falls flat by one simple demonstration: Use existing arm + teleoperation and conduct X amount of tasks (could be a mobile robot too, or a car for that matter). Now find a software that have same versatility in task execution as the human. Most softwares for simple robotics manipulation tasks lose out to human operating it directly, bar efficiency maybe, in an static controlled environment even using the same control and perception system. Yet human controlling these arms directly show that the hardware is capable enough to conduct those tasks. The "hardware lags behind" statement is if anything just a convenient excuse from the software / automation developers in Robotics, (also being one of them myself) shifting the blame to others, or have a sense of false highground. The need of Lidar on early self driving cars was the same motivation; somehow softwares couldn't just use camera but needed an additional 6th sense, that humans don't even need, and still performed quite bad. |