[yunohn]

> as Alphabet apparently thinks everyone is still doing. The obliviousness of suggesting that using ML models for robotic control is some unique new idea is really off-putting.

Intrinsic/Alphabet are not suggesting they are somehow unaware of easily-Google-able state of the art in ML robotics. They literally used to own Boston Dynamics.

From the post, the second demo of their tech (“Two robots use perception, force control, and multi-robot planning to assemble a simple piece of furniture”), is very clearly much more than “moving Petri dishes”.

FAANG has access to the leading factories in Shenzhen, and heavily utilize robot tech in their HW supply chains.

[kortilla]

> FAANG has access to the leading factories in Shenzhen, and heavily utilize robot tech in their HW supply chains.

Do you know what the N stands for in FAANG?

[yunohn]

This is really boring pedantry, that does not further the conversation. Do you have anything to reply to from the rest of my comment?

[kortilla]

It’s not pedantry. Those companies have effectively nothing in common when it comes to HW.

[fragmede]

It's pedantry. FAAG is not an acronym in common usage (and is uncomfortably close to being a slur), so the more easily understood, less correct word was used instead. To point out that one of the companies doesn't produce consumer hardware doesn't invalidate the underlying point, so what is it, if not pedantry?

[kortilla]

I’m pointing out that it’s stupid to use an acronym that includes mega companies that don’t have access to cutting edge Shenzhen manufacturing and excludes ones that have far more access.

Facebook doesn’t have better Shenzhen access than Microsoft or you know, hardware focused companies like nvidia.

Using “FAANG” is a red flag that the commenter has no idea wtf they are talking about when it comes to the hardware industry.

[cma]

They probably actually still have DVD handling machines.