[piiswrong]

But if you really think about it, flipping rocket is a trivial toy problem in simulation. But useful humanoid robot is very hard even in simulation. Just look at some of the SOTA control theory research. Their simulated robots looks stupid.

[runawaybottle]

Universal Healthcare is also a toy problem, but a true albatross concept beunricratically in the US. I say it’s a toy problem because we literally have copy and paste templates from most of the western world that we can use.

Flipping that rocket and getting NASA contracts to go actually do it against Boeing/Lockheed/etc is not a toy problem.

I don’t want to say it would never have happened without Spacex, but probably it would not have happened in our lifetime.

[majewsky]

Flipping rockets is a simpler problem in the sense that it the required technology already existed, there just wasn't anyone with enough incentive and resources to actually do it.

Human-level robotics, on the other hand, is not a problem of missing incentive. For all I know about the field (as a casual observer), we are still several breakthroughs away from achieving this goal.

[rlt]

How do you define the “required technology” for these problems?

We have actuators, sensors, and computers to build humanoid robots, isn’t it “just” a software problem like flipping rockets was?

[itsoktocry]

You seem to be missing the point that landing the rocket is a cool trick that may or may not be useful right now.

There's a difference between not being able to do something, and not having a reason to.

[runawaybottle]

Some of you are absurd. Landing rockets is a neat trick? Okay, how about doing it for NASA contracts?

Enough.