According to Elon Musk’s most recent tweet,” Tesla will have truly valuable human robots in lower production for Tesla internal use next year,” robots with physical human-like traits and performing “genuinely useful” functions might be available soon.
But, important human drones have remained a fantasy that never seems to quite catch up with fact despite years of trying. Are we ultimately on the core of a miracle? Is it pertinent to ask whether human-like drones are actually necessary.
Tesla’s Optimus machine is just one of several emerging human computers, joining the likes of Boston Dynamics Atlas, Figure AI’s Number 01, Sanctuary AI’s Phoenix and many others. They typically take the form of a humanoid system, which is occasionally able to walk and occasionally jump, among other athletic feats. A pair of machine arms and hands that can manipulate various kinds of objects with skill and tact may be mounted on top of this system.
Artificial intelligence is hidden within the sight, capable of planning transportation, identifying items, and carrying out tasks with these things. The most widely envisaged uses for such robots are in factories, carrying out repetitive, dirty, boring and dangerous tasks, and working alongside humans, jointly, carrying a rope up for example.
They are also suggested for use in service-related jobs, perhaps in place of the more cliched-looking “meet and greet” and” tour guide” service computers of the current generation. They could also be used to provide personalized care and treatment in social care, where there have been efforts to raise and move people, such as the Riken Robear (admittedly this was more keep than human ).
Humanoid sexual robots have a more mature and expanding marketplace. Incidentally, while many people recognise the moral and ethical issues related to these, the use of human computers in different locations seems to get less discussion. It is, nevertheless, proving hard to deliver human robots in practice. What justifies this?
Finding versatile bi movement in various terrain poses a number of engineering challenges. Humans spent roughly four million years developing this technology, which is quite amazing given how advanced we are today. However, people eventually learn to incorporate a sizable array of perceiving abilities.
Also, achieving the dexterous adjustment of things, which come in all styles, sizes, weights, levels of vulnerability, is proving persistent with robots. There has been significant improvement, though, such as the nimble fingers from UK organization Shadow Robot.
Robots have only a few point of contact, such as their fingertips, compared to the human body, which is covered in a soft, pliable skin that continually sensations and adapts to the globe.
In a fluid world, making more of an effort to improve public tasks requires greater advancement in both sensing and electrical capabilities as well as the automation of particular tasks on factory assembly lines.
Finally, if you are going to make a robot seem people, then there is an assumption that it would also need to connect with us like a man, possibly even respond emotionally.
However, this is where things can get really tricky, because if our brains, which have evolved to recognize non-verbal elements of communication, do n’t perceive all the micro-expressions that are interpreted at a subconscious level, the humanoid robot can come across as positively creepy.
These are just a few of the most pressing research issues currently confronting international research teams focused on robotics and human-robot interaction. There’s also the additional constraint of deploying humanoid robots in our ever-changing noisy real world, with rain, dust and heat.
These circumstances are very different from the ones under which they are analyzed. So why should n’t we concentrate on creating robust, human-like systems?
Recreating ourselves
Why are Musk and many others ‘ efforts to create human-like robots a priority? Do our robotic companions have a similarity to us?
One theory is that we have gradually modified our environment to fit the human body. Our cities and buildings, for instance, are largely constructed to accommodate our physical appearance. Therefore, robots are a clear choice to take on this role as well.
However, it should be noted that our constructed environments and tools frequently assume a certain degree of strength, dexterity, and sensory ability, which is detrimental to a lot of people, especially those who are disabled. Would this division be further perpetuated by the development of stronger metal machines in society?
Perhaps we should recognize that robots are a part of the world and that they can make things that better accommodate the diversity of human bodies. We could put more effort into integrating robotics technologies into our buildings, furniture, tools and vehicles, making them smarter and more adaptable, so that they become more accessible for everyone.
It is striking how the body types that are currently being created by robots do n’t reflect the diversity of people. Perhaps there are deeper reasons for our glaring obsession with human-like robots. The tech industry frequently uses ideas from the god-like desire to create new versions of ourselves, which is a fantasy that is prevalent in dystopian science fiction.
Or perhaps, humanoid robots are a” Moon shot”, a vision that we can all understand but is incredibly difficult to achieve. In summary, while we may not be entirely certain why we want to travel there, significant engineering advancements are likely to result from attempting to succeed.
Steve Benford is Professor of Collaborative Computing, University of Nottingham and Praminda Caleb-Solly is Professor of Embodied Intelligence, School of Computer Science, University of Nottingham
The Conversation has republished this article under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.