Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Skudge_Muffin t1_jdxu6ej wrote

Does your mind really function this way? Deflect all challenges with insults to intelligence and vague airs of intellectual superiority?

We can walk and run, but our walking and running mechanics are built for persistence hunting. Is that the most useful way legs can be designed? What if we want something that can move faster? We certainly cannot fly or swim or dig very fast, which is why we use tools to get around those limitations. Wouldn't those be useful functions? Are our human legs compatible with a design focused around having those additional functions?

We can certainly go up stairs, but stairs are a human construct built to suit our human needs. Why walk up stairs if you can fly or stick to walls?

Dexterous manipulators.. See, the thing about fingers is they're pretty big at times and pretty small at other times. Wouldn't it be more useful to have variable manipulators that can change size? What about a manipulator that can soften to mould around/inside an object being grabbed and then harden once the desired shape is reached? This form of manipulation would essentially be an all-purpose screwdriver, among many other things.

Is the human hand REALLY that efficient at manipulation, or is it the best that we currently know because we haven't spent much time thinking about it?

Humanoid robots fit right into existing infrastructure, true. You know what else fits right into existing infrastructure? Cats and dogs. They also have the advantage of being much smaller. They even have limbs, too! Past that, though, we don't need to be confined to building copies of animals.

> Billions of years of evolution can't be wrong... or can it.... Only a redditor could suggest otherwise haha

This is pure brain rot and shows a failure of understanding of what the process of evolution is. Human-level sentient species could theoretically have come about any number of ways, and those other ways could theoretically be much more effective and well-equipped at navigating our current human society than we are. We aren't a species that is perfectly fit to our environment, we are a species that passes the bar of "Bare minimum for perpetuation within an environment". And even then, we have no idea if our ability to perpetuate ourselves will extend any further than it already has. You are making a lot of assumptions here.

The way I see it, you're out to prove your intelligence on reddit for some reason. I hope you find what you need because constantly comparing your own competence and intelligence to that of other people isn't a good place to be. Ask yourself why you value intelligence so much.

1

LongjumpingBottle t1_jdxwz9d wrote

Can a quadruped operate a fork lift, cook a meal... cmon my guy

flying? will just assume ur joking wit that one

As for the other ideas, great ideas tbh, just a little too sci-fi atm. Not at the liquid terminator age yet

evolution slander is also a dumb take

"bare minimum for perpetuation" resulted in a super computer that runs on the power it takes to run a light bulb

the bipedal design is the most efficient and adaptable. simple as.

Maybe instead it could have 4 arms, extendable wheels, sticky fingers, and jetpacks. But I recall that I live in a world governed by physics where things cost energy and resources.

Again. we're just two dummies on reddit. I defer to the people actually working on this.

​

oh also Notice how you've moved the goal post btw. We've gone from specialized robots, to robots that supercede the human form in generality (shapeshifting, flying, sticking to walls)

​

You've lost the plot, champ

1

Skudge_Muffin t1_jdxyrqm wrote

>Can a quadruped operate a fork lift, cook a meal

... Robotic quadrupeds? Yeah, why not?

>flying? will just assume ur joking wit that one

Why? Flight is a pretty useful ability to have and we have consumer-level flying robots already.

>As for the other ideas, great ideas tbh, just a little too sci-fi atm.

Do we not already have expanding flexible robotic muscles?

>evolution slander is also a dumb take

It isn't slander, it's a fact of the matter. Evolution doesn't "care" about efficiency. It doesn't care about anything. Evolution is the propagation of genes within an environment. You don't need to be the best theoretical propagator, you just need to be able to propagate at or above replacement. Essentially, our efficiency has been decided by our competition and the external factors we've faced, as well as how beneficial certain actions have been to our survival. We aren't built for deep diving because we don't really ever need to go to the bottom of the ocean.

>"bare minimum for perpetuation" resulted in a super computer that runs on the power it takes to run a light bulb

You've lost yourself to ego. That's an amazing fact for you because it's all you know. There is no objective or subjective scale to measure this achievement to, so who knows how impressive that really is? Might it be the case that, given infinite trials of human-like species, we're actually in the bottom percentile of achievement?

>Again. we're just two dummies on reddit. I defer to the people actually working on this.

Then defer to them and stop commenting on the subject. Don't bother discussing it.

>oh also Notice how you've moved the goal post btw. We've gone from specialized robots, to robots that supercede the human form in generality

You haven't proven that bipedal human-like robots are an efficient platform for an all-purpose robot. You haven't even proven that there is demand for an all-purpose robot rather than specialized robots (My phone cannot clean my living room floor, my phone cannot drive me to the store, my phone cannot mow my lawn or water my garden. My phone cannot feed my dog or function as hardware tools. Hell, I wouldn't even use my phone to program a webpage and computer science seems like one of the first things you would design a mobile computing device for.)

If you're worried about your ability to engage with this subject, that is your fear, not mine.

Edit: Also, if you want to talk about moving goalposts, you have gone from "General-purpose human bots" to "Bipedal vaguely humanoid function-fit search and rescue machines"

1

LongjumpingBottle t1_jdy0eyu wrote

I conclude my argument with the following

1

Skudge_Muffin t1_jdy2cjz wrote

Ah, thereabout comes your ego. The part that shows you're not as smart as you think you are is your thinking that a revenue number is enough to prove your competence to others. Did you stop to consider plenty of incompetent people have even more money than that? Many people got lucky on crypto, many people have rich parents. This breakdown in logical thought squarely pegs your ability to traverse ideas.

1