| I think a lot of this is true, but not as critical as is being interpreted. Compare the economics of purely cognitive AI to in-world robotics AI. Pure cognitive: Massive scale systems for fast, frictionless and incredibly efficient cognitive system deployment and distribution of benefits are solved. On tap even. Cloud computing and the Internet. What is the amortized cost per task? Almost nothing. In-world: The cost of extracting raw resources, parts chain, material process chain, manufacturing, distributing, maintaining, etc. Then what is the amortized cost per task, for one robot? Several orders of magnitude more expensive, per task! There is no comparison. Doing that profitably isn’t going to be the norm for many years. At what price does a kitchen robot make sense? Not at $1,000,000. “Only $100,000?” “Only $25,000? “Only $10k”? Lower than that? Compared to a Claude plan? That many people still turn down just to use free tier? Long before general house helper robots makes any economic sense, we will have had walking talking, socializing, profitable-to-build sex robots at higher price points for price insensitive owners. There are people who will pay high prices for that, when costs come down. That will be the canary for general robotic servants or helpers. The cost isn’t intelligence. There isn’t a particular challenge with in-world information processing and control. It’s the cost of the physical thing that processing happens in. This is a purely economic problem. Not an AI problem at all. |