[viraptor]

Why would you want to use human tools? Human tools exist because of how we work. If you're building a robot, it's extremely easier to give it a functionally equivalent attachment instead. (rather than a functionality equivalent arm with enough fine-grained pressure feedback to be able to reliably grab things)

Teleoperation works great on purpose built robots too - for example https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20140516-i-operate-on-peo...

Or phrased a different way, what environment are you thinking of where a fully generalised highly advanced humanoid robot and its maintenance is more cost effective than diying or airshipping a specialised handle?

[ulrikrasmussen]

Assuming the cost of the droid is low enough, I think the use-case is to have it do ad-hoc tasks using the tools you have at hand right now, without the need to invest in an expensive specialized tool which only the robot can use. The idea is not efficiency but versatility.

[whilenot-dev]

Just think for a moment on all the unique interfaces we humans encounter with our tools on a daily basis*. No interior in our cars look the same, coffee machines have varying functionalities, every vacuum has its buttons placed differently, all our digital interfaces (smartphones, smart home control panels, digital oscilloscopes, synthesizers etc.), even simple remote controls etc. Some of these interfaces are just some designers choice on top of an already standardized digital protocol (CAN bus, Bluetooth) - so this thing takes the hard way and needs to adapt to all those interfaces in order to be more useful than "can follow you around"?

Honestly, I think that would be quite an achievement and could be great for something like elderly care. Although this thing needs to be able to do useful tactile tasks first, like putting a thread through a pinhole, or cutting your vegetables in cubes of equal size. I'd look forward to seeing a demo!

*: How many things do you personally encounter with the exact same interface? iPhones yes-ish (apps can be renamed and shuffled around, the control center can be customized etc.), but not even QWERTY keyboards. I think we humans constantly strive for some form of individuality.

[conductr]

Yeah I think of it this way. I have an expensive vacuum and an expensive lawnmower. I paid a lot because they have a pretty dumb level of auto (eg roomba). If I could have bought a commodity push vac and push mower this humanoid could operate it. But they could also serve dozens of other valuable services with cheap existing tools for which no roomba equivalent even exists. At some point being surrounded by purpose built robots is not the best strategy even though when you are only focusing on a single purpose a specialized robot seems best.

Someone made a comment about energy efficiency and Bitcoin and AI should tell you everything about how much “we” actually care about energy efficiency, if this robot had infinite learning potential and the physical ability of a human it’s totally going to win out in the race to mechanize the world.

[jayd16]

Well I don't know that I quite buy it myself but if you want the thing to work along side humans you can't just put special handles in everything.

If you want a robot to pour you coffee from a coffee maker humans also use, how do you imagine that working?

[viraptor]

> If you want a robot to pour you coffee from a coffee maker humans also use, how do you imagine that working?

Two standardised grabbers for round and flat things. Simple three-finger device should cover almost all of the dishes. Same for water/beans refills. Zigbee/wifi/ir/whatever local comms to trigger the coffee machine.

[loanedempathy]

To be glib: you're not competing with KUKA, you're competing with the parking lot at Home Depot.

The market here isn't competing with toolmakers, it's competing with temp agencies.

[ekianjo]

Because all these tools already exist and require zero research.

[thomasfedb]

Probably because we have quite a lot of human tools already.