Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Humanoid robot is a bad engineering design anyway.
We interact with the world as humans, it stands to reason a general purpose humanoid robot would be capable of interacting in similar ways (or at least this should be the design goal). This immediately solves several issues. First, it gives us a baseline of understanding in terms of interactions and tasks. There's no guessing how the device or interface should work. Second, it establishes general capabilities and limitations. There may be more efficient single purpose or limited designs for a subset of general tasks, but as a whole, a humanoid robot is the perfect general purpose approach.
Dude, humans are not perfect general purpose solutions. That's why we use machines or animals. Also, I don't get what you're saying 'baseline understanding of interactions and tasks'?
How are humans inefficient in design? We've managed to rule the planet with our design? Are you even human bro?!
😆 so hard to know on lemmy who's human
To give examples of inefficiency - we have five fingers and surely one fewer makes no difference in capability, we have 2 legs whereas 4 will be more stable and faster, eyes can't see in uv or ir.
There are some things that don't really effect robots but shows poor design like complexity of nose and throat being a choking hazard :D.
Managing to be successful as a species is just evolutionary competence, which is a "random walk" through genetic changes that happened to create something better than others (not the best, just better than rest) for a larger set of environments
What should the robots look like then?
It doesnt matter. This is the next step after Ai to get to dystopia. Cant stop the future.
Only way to stop dystopia is by taxing wealth, not work.
in theory, if they managed to get them to work properly, and we were to ignore the privacy issues (the lack thereof). a humanoid robot would be amazing and revolutionary.
it isn't just for chores though, once they are competent enough to perform productive labour it'll replace most jobs.
assume almost all human labour to be a thing of the past, and I doubt those tech rich would want to restructure society so we don't end up like soylent green.
Yes, it would be amazing and revolutionary. However, you achieve the same with other designs more economically.
only capitalism can make a world, where labour is a thing is the past into a dystopia.
Under capitalism, a post scarcity society would be hell on earth.