Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

TheLuteceSibling t1_iwpsk3p wrote

Making something requires precision, and making something smaller requires more precision. Your hypothetical requires that we make something that in turn makes something else with even greater precision than we ourselves are capable of.

Also… computer chips are small, but the process to make them cannot be replicated by some miniature robot.

2

Benching_Data t1_iwpsvzl wrote

That makes sense, I always thought a robot could be far more precise than a human but I think obviously things are more complicated than that.

1

Moskau50 t1_iwpw2hh wrote

The robot might be, but the human has to verify it. How do you confirm that it’s accurate/precise aside from having a person check it? The robot will do exactly as it’s told, but that doesn’t mean it’s right, just that it’s obedient.

1

Phage0070 t1_iwpvm0f wrote

Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):

ELI5 is not for subjective or speculative replies - only objective explanations are permitted here; your question is asking for subjective or speculative replies.

ELI5 is not for hypotheticals.

If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the detailed rules first. If you believe this was removed erroneously, please use this form and we will review your submission.

1

Elgatee t1_iwpxlun wrote

Not everything scale that simply.

Let's go for one very simple issue: Chips. Chips can only be made so small for physics reason. We're currently making chips and motherboard so small we can't make them smaller and still have them function reliably. We're talking nano meter wide circuitry. You can almost count the wideness in terms of molecule. A single grain of dust can already cause malfunction in these kind of things.

Nanomachines (son) are still really far away from being an effective solution. And that's not talking about batteries autonomy on these things.

1