that’s literally what the Tesla Bot is being designed as

I date a robot. Semi intelligent exceeds expectations

Google has already done that and it works really well, but a bit slowly. There is no reason the technology can not improve with time.

https://say-can.github.io/

https://youtu.be/ysFav0b472w

I think this idea is new and pretty cool however.

> Without getting into details like neural networks, transformer, and whatnot,** I figure we can use the same tech to be able to predict the next physical movement a robot does.** So if you were to construct a robot that looks like a human and has the same abilities, i.e it can rotate and extend its limbs the same way, then given enough data it could learn to move like a human the same way ChatGPT can talk like a human.

> The input for this would be a video footage and software that can identify limb movements. An easy way start would be to tape a factory line where human workers do some kind of repetitive movements. Next thing you know, we could have robots doing dishes and mopping the floor! Add ChatGPT-like abilities and it will be able to talk as well.

It would be like physical intelligence.

Can you provide a link? I know they are training robots to work in their factories, but is it using the same concepts as ChatGPT and LLMs? That will be interesting.

That's really cool but not exactly what I meant. It uses language models to understand intent and to train the robot to talk, but not to train its physical movements. In order to do that, and to train on human movement, the robot will have to have 2 arms and 2 legs.

I wish we could date robots (that look attractive and not pieces of metal), that would solve so many problems.

Yes, I like your idea.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimus_(robot)

The problem is, these statistical "AI" models actually do pretty significant factual errors.

If you let it, for example, design yourself a rocket engine there is a fairly high probability that it will explode when you actually build such an engine and switch it on. Most of the engine could be "correct" but all it takes is an error and you get potentially catastrophic failure.

Might not be a problem with a small and cute little toy robot. Might get someone killed with an industrial robot.

So yeah, sure, you can let one of these design you a robot. Or some action the robot takes. But you need an actual human expert who knows what he/she is doing to "proofread" the output and correct the errors in the design or action.

It's linear algebra all the way down.

[removed]

Hi, michaelscodingspot. Thanks for contributing. However, your submission was removed from /r/Futurology.

> > Consider how ChatGPT and Large Language Models works: they scan the internet to gather as much text as possible, and able to somehow create connections that predict the next word in a sentence. > > Without getting into details like neural networks, transformer, and whatnot, I figure we can use the same tech to be able to predict the next physical movement a robot does. So if you were to construct a robot that looks like a human and has the same abilities, i.e it can rotate and extend its limbs the same way, then given enough data it could learn to move like a human the same way ChatGPT can talk like a human. > > The input for this would be a video footage and software that can identify limb movements. An easy way start would be to tape a factory line where human workers do some kind of repetitive movements. Next thing you know, we could have robots doing dishes and mopping the floor! Add ChatGPT-like abilities and it will be able to talk as well. > > What do you think?

> Rule 11 - Titles should accurately and truthfully represent the content of the submission.

Refer to the subreddit rules, the transparency wiki, or the domain blacklist for more information.

[Message the Mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/Futurology&subject=Question regarding the removal of this submission by /u/michaelscodingspot&message=I have a question regarding the removal of this submission if you feel this was in error.