Elon Musk Says Optimus Will Be Great For Japan As Country Battles Labor Shortages

**I am a bot. This is a friendly reminder that unwelcoming toxic/griefing/pessimistic sniping comments that are not on topic and don’t move the discussion forward will be removed. A ban will be issued if necessary. Consider this before commenting. Report posts or comments that violate the [Rules](https://www.reddit.com/mod/teslamotors/rules/). Thank you.** If you are unable to find it, use the link to it. We are not a support sub, please make sure to use the proper resources if you have questions: [Official Tesla Support](https://www.tesla.com/support), [r/TeslaLounge](https://www.reddit.com/r/TeslaLounge/) personal content | [Discord Live Chat](https://discord.gg/tesla) for anything. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/teslamotors) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Has anyone seen the video of the latest version of Optimus and every other miracle AI Robot for that matter. These bots are NOT REMOTELY CLOSE to offering any type of utility that these people/companies keep talking about and the demo’s that appear more human have all been remotely controlled by a human totally defeating the purpose.

Companies will put up with a slow robot that’s promised software upgrades since it’ll work 20hrs a day and won’t need health insurance and benefits…

The issue is, even if one day they ‘work’, first, why does it have to look like a human, current Kuko’s do jobs now without being humanoid and second the cost of the backend AI compute will be MASSIVE. Like electrical usage alone for the compute would far exceed the cost or time savings to a company or person, not to mention downtime involved in repair of complex robotics systems.

The intention with Optimus is all the AI it needs is fine local, so it won’t need a constant connection so long as the training was done right. I imagine early on it’ll relay on the backend much more to understand the complex asks if it. That being said, a lot of these companies are going to have cheap labor overseas controlling them…which is freaking terrifying.

But hear me out: Robots... To repair robots Pfouuuu Mindblown

Elon says… a lot of things

They look like humans so that they fit into all the infrastructure that we've built for ourselves. They can go where humans go and do what humans do. They're general purpose not task specific robots

No one wants your slow ass robot!

They are built to interact with the same world we do, thats why they are building them to be human like. So it can grab objects the same way, use stairs, open doors etc… we had millions of years of evolution to come up with our current design, so its a pretty safe bet.

Posts containing „Elon Musk Says“ have zero value.

I keep hearing this but it’s a VERY half baked concept. We humans are inefficient in our movements and contextual workspaces. Task specific robots are significantly more efficient in repair, compute and on space. Even the act of walking is more energy intensive than a round wheel rolling. If you have a humanoid robot the skill set it has to run compute for, to even try to utilize its flexibility is VAST compared to task specific robotics.

We can’t even get them to run large, purpose designed, wiring harnesses in defined setting on assembly lines yet. This will happen on day, but we are not remotely close to that day.

I think with the number of competitors existing unless they somehow delivery something years ahead they won't make that much x unit. Even if they find a company willing to buy them.

Just not having to have 1:1’s with robots make all managers want robots instead of people

The new PM will buy 100 million just to please him.

Literally this. I was criticizing my wife's new lawn roomba when I saw it took forever and had to recharge twice just to do the backyard once. Then I realized that it's mowing 24/7. It never sleeps, it never stops, like the terminator. Who cares how long it takes.

Theses robots are just a more expensive, less useful verision of robotic arms/hands... Why would you want a robot to serve you popcorn or drinks? Just use a damn 1k self service machine. Or just remove all the lower part (hips and legs) and put it over a roomba, because that's more stable, faster and cheaper.

This is exactly it, the self-serve machine is the better solution, significantly less space required than a human workspace, more efficient since it only does one task and it largely doesn’t require MASSIVE amounts of compute to do that one task efficiently.

My money is on the Japanese developing a superior robot before elon's ever hits retail.

Agreed

They will never replace dedicated industrial robots. That is the goal. You will have dedicated robots which are extremely fast and efficient for repetitive tasks. For highly chaotic, hard to programme and diverse ones, humanoid robots will be better. Not because they will be faster, but because they will be extremely cheap and versatile. You can have a robot in a Small restaurant that cooks hamburgers and fries extremely well and costs say 10000 EUR. Or you can have a slower humanoid robot that costs 20000 eur but which can clean the resto in the evening, serve the customers if needed etc etc. it will never be as good as dedicated robots but much cheaper than them due to mass manufacturing.

He sells a dream.

Assuming the robots would be controlled by a human would it be cheaper to and safer for a company to replace dangerous tasks with robots for liability reasons

Maybe Optimus is not of value yet, maybe Elon his promises are empty again, but robots are inevitable and companies doing them now may not NOW have the product we want but in 10-20 years? Yes.

Yeah... The thing is, he usually delivers. Sometimes a decade later. But usually delivers. It is usually risky to bet against him.

Depends on the task. Wheels are way more energy efficient, cheaper to make and cheaper to maintain than legs. Less moving parts and overall less hassle and less that can go wrong. Way less costs in terms of research and development. So if you have a task where wheels can do the job. They are the way better option.

no one said anything about them being slow. They cannot do many of the things avertised.

Japan depending on American robots? After his theatrics this year in politics? Is he still high?

Looks like it is quite impossible for Musk to simply stay silent for once.

Do you have any clue how complex humanoid robots are? As far as complexity they are about as complex as robots get. Optimus has 40 actuators themselves. The idea that they are going to be "cheap" is ridiculous. Task specific robots will always be cheaper and more reliable. One robot dedicated to cooking. One Roomba for cleaning floors and etc.

You mean usually doesn't deliver...

This will be decades

There's lots of utility in the near term, even if it's just teleoperation. Yes, a box on wheels with a remote controlled arm could do many of the same things. But... The versatility of our world being designed around humanoid form is where this makes sense.  Think of how many super remote jobs there are. Someone driving 50 to hundreds of miles to go check a valve or switch etc. That could be performed by much fewer humans and with less wasted energy by leaving an on-site robot that stays at each location.  And I understand that Elon is a timeline confused hype man, but he's not the only game in town. There's real competition and the rate that AI is going and the way they are training these things,  there's no way the skills don't transfer and land in the bots with a software update. Maybe it won't be Optimus, but it will be someone. iRobot is coming and it's sooner than you think.

this approach is called biomimicry. It has never worked in any field where it has been applied. Ask yourself do we build flying machines that mimic birds. Do we build communication devices that communicate try he same way biological systems do? No. The fundamental reason why the approach is flawed is that the set of requirements that biological systems evolved for are not the same as the ones engineers face when designing systems. For instance humans evolved legs because legs are far better than wheels in natural environments, however wheels are far better in the types of environments humans construct.

Hey I am still waiting for my full FSD. You have to remember that Elon is a great industrialist. Like all great industrialists throughout history, they take mature and sometimes nearly mature technologies and figure out how to produce them on a massive scale. Both Tesla and SpaceX have been great at this.

This is the largest point that it is difficult to make with people that are so enamored with the humanoid robot narrative being sold currently. I had a professor in college that was a retired Boeing airframe engineer that had a hilarious model of a 737 with bird feathers, a beak and two feet on it that had a sign that said, ‘This doesn’t exist for a reason. Please Ask Me Why!’

For one task, yes. But the bet is that in the long run, it’s cheaper to have a human shaped robot than hundreds or thousands of specialized machines/robots because we’ve built the world for humans.  A human shaped robot could drive your existing car vs needing a car that can drive itself etc etc.  Just explaining the thinking here, not arguing how close it is or isn’t.

For cleaning, I see your point. I also see it for any tasks that are well defined and for which a large market already exists. Still feel that with sufficiently powerful and flexible AI (which is a huge question mark btw) there could be a huge market for generic robots that can assist or replace humans in a number of jobs. I guess we will see clearer in 5 years.

You car is gonna drive itself, it won't need a humanoid. And for every task you can imagine, is better to build a specific machine bcause the productivity will always be higher and will offset the higher starting price. It always was tgis way and it will always will be.

We already have a massive shortage of home health providers and it is gonna get way worse because we are getting exponentially better at treating cancer (after similar improvement in cardiac care) which means majority of people will live to be old and too disabled to do basic care for themselves but has no cause to die. So it may be true now that humanoids are not their yet, but we are going to absolutely need them (and they will be ready then) when every country in the world will have 30% of the population being too old to walk to the bathroom

This is exactly what people said about personal computers. At the beginning they were just expensive machines that do things people can do much cheaper with radios, phones, type writers, TVs, etc Humanoids are important because they can do everything a person can, sure you can buy a simpler machine for each individual task, but they can do everything. The will do the laundry and make the bed, and take the trash out, mow the lawn and paint the walls and cook dinner and whatever else they can learn by downloading some software. Edit : This is like this now famous interview where bill gates is trying to explain the Internet https://youtube.com/shorts/tgODUgHeT5Y?si=tTzNFvvvdwWW6Bdg

I think you need to zoom out a bit, look at how fast these are iterating. And widen your scope beyond Tesla, there are better humanoids out there. The AI for these things is progressing at an insane rate.

Yeahz probably

The difference is that humans were being replaced by machines because they can do things better and faster. This humanoids will do things better than humans? Sure, but they will never do them faster than a specificaly design machine that will be, at best, the same price (but probably cheaper) but also have way higher productivity. Jack of all trades, master of none. In a production line, you want masters. That will pay back the price difference with productivity.

Actually faster is debatable, robots don’t get bored, and they can work 24/7/365 for 5 years straight if plugged into the wall. a single robot can replace a a full time human worker even if it works 1/3 of the speed simply because the robot doesn’t need to stop working at all so it will be at work for 24 hours while the human is limited to 8 And it gets crazier when you factor in money. If you are paying the human $50k/year which is low-end as far as factory salaries go, you would need to pay him that much every year, and account for raises, insurance, etc A $200k robot with 5 year warranty would be a better deal than a $50k/year human

Reddit posters unable to extrapolate capability beyond that is directly shown to them News at 11

So instead of one human shaped robot helping someone around the house you're going to try and justify and build dozens of specific robots and every task that doesn't have a robot you'll need to wait 3-5 more years for a business to appear and build that robot?

The first cars were very unreliable and a lot less useful than horses.

Re read my comment. I said they will never be faster than specificaly designed machines, not humans.

Labor shortages in Japan doesn’t mean there are labor shortages everywhere… Another way to do geographic arbitrage.

I am not comparing it to humans, mate, but to cheaper, simpler, specificaly design machines. It makes no sense building a humanoid with arms and legs when you just need a rotatory platform and an arm to do a job, for example. Or even other simpler designs, like a drink/coffee machine. Will these humanoids be cheaper than humans? Sure. Will they be cheaper than simpler, more effective machines? No. It is just a matter of physics.

These things are ComicCon consplay. They only exist to try to replicate what they've seen in movies, not because they'll actually be useful or peole will want them. They just want to make the movie prop come to life "cuz it's cool." Surprised they didn't sling a comically oversized energy sword over it's back to look extra cool. Robots won't be humanoid, but task based. Roomba, not Rosie the Robot pushing a vacuum.

And re-read his comment. He said they don't have to be faster due to their ability to keep working without regular breaks.

If I can have a robot that makes my bed at a glacial pace, but can then also fold laundry, clean some counters, and clean the floor, then it's better than a bespoke bed folding robot that sits useless the other 23h54m of the day.

Again, re read any of my comment as well. Hint: Machines don't need regular breaks either.

What happens when those wheels reach a single stair?

Nice, state of the art tech that will be a useless commodity that will only suit 0.1% of the richest people on earth. Amazing. I am talking about industrial production and tasks that can make money and your best use case is limiting it to "passing butter".

That world built for humans line is so tired. Humans aren't even any human size or shape. They come in 1 foot long to 8 feet long, between around 1 to 600 pounds, so what human is everything in the world made to acomodate? As long as it can work a doorknob, and master the art of stairs, I'm sure the rest will be pretty basic to solve without making a creepy looking, top heavy biped that will crush your pet trying to bring you the moning paper because it bent over.

You ever seen a side view of a B2 bomber and a peregrine falcon? We absolutely do use biomimcry. Just because we have the ability to create thrust with different types of engines and don't have to flap the wings of the B2 doesn't mean bird flight wasn't analyzed and modeled to help create cross sectional similarities.

Bro I think the people you are arguing with are Optimus robots stuck in a loop.

Like he promised the hyperloop, you mean, that turned out to be a project to block high speed rail.

He sells a grift.

It actualy makes sense.

Of course specialized machines will be better if you have a fixed production line that is intended to run for years. They aren’t replacing those. But the reasons factories still use humans is because the wide assortment of variable tasks that are required in any work environment and also the ability to be retrained. The humans can be moved around to various tasks as the business evolved, specialized machines are more limited to specific tasks. This also helps with selling used equipment, if you want to sell some of your robot work force you can simply sell the humanoid robots to a health care facility or to construction company, etc as opposed to being limited to selling to a competitor who needs the same kid of equipment

If the robot takes twice as long to complete a task, but then can move on to a different task and increase its utilization then it's a net gain. You're imaging a dedicated robot doing one thing 24 hours a day and comparing it to a general purpose robot that is specifically being designed to handle a wide variety of tasks. No one is saying a general purpose robot is going to replace a dedicated robot that is able to be fully utilized. Compare the robot vacuum in my house that takes 1.5 hours to vacuum and mop my entire main floor to a general purpose robot that takes 3 hours to vacuum and mop my main floor, but then can be utilized in other activities through the day while I'm at work rather than sitting dormant the rest of the day like my robot vacuum currently does. THAT'S where the benefit comes.

And I just explained why your comparison doesn't make sense when trying to disavow the utility of a general purpose robot.

I own a home and have a family of 4. If there was an affordable robot that could clean, do laundry, tend to the yard, and cook, it would be HUGE. The "factory worker use case" may be very far off, but I wouldn't underestimate the consumer market.

There's Chinese robots you can buy right now for 15k The hardware is not expensive A servo is like $15 on digikey

Humanoids would also need to be "retrained" via updates, that will cost money, because no robot will do everything as soon as it ia out of the factory. Let alone that once you buy it, it will probably have to be set up to work in that exact place. Also, as any asset, will lose value over time due to depreciation. It will also have a maintenance that we seem to ignore (we are already having issues when some our phones get an update, I don't even want to think about such complex equipment).

I think the idea is that if they can scale these down a reasonable cost, you can plug them in anywhere you currently have a human. Like, you can rework your entire concession stand setup and retrain people for self service, or you can just but a robot for $5k and stick him in with what you already have. Maybe you have a door man for the busiest time but now you buy a robot that handles all the overnight shifts, etc.

I think they are trying to be cheaper in aggregate since they are general purpose machines vs specialized. Yes, you could bolt a rotary arm to the floor, but then you can't also have humans work in the same space for different shifts. It also won't change the trash when it's slow, etc.

Yep, I may be missing the consumer market, maybe because those chores doesn't annoy me or take that much time in my life. We will find out in 5-10 years, I guess.

> Sure, but they will never do them faster than a soecificaly design machine that will be, at best, the same price (but probably cheaper) but also have way higher productivity. Jack of all trades, master of none. and outside car manufacturing (because that's a 1980s thing to have robots there), why aren't they crawling under these machines that replace workers by being specialized and not-human like? why do we still buy from 3rd world places if manufacturing labor costs should be near 0?

Please do not displace these people :( https://www.independent.co.uk/asia/japan/tokyo-robot-cafe-dawn-japan-b2677817.html

Yes, but you are assuming people are starting from scratch with specialized systems. That's the beauty of a human-like robot. If I own a trash company, of course an autonomous trash truck will be better at the job than a humanoid robot. But if I already have a fleet of 10 trucks, I may consider buying 3 human robots that can drive vs one autonomous truck. You can plug them into existing work flows instead of reinventing the entire operation.

They don't understand logic on this sub.

Bruh I’m so lost in this thread, what the hell are people even arguing about. Just throw some thumbs onto a robot and boom they should be able to do whatever we can lol.

[removed]

This is supposed to be a general purpose robot. Who cares if wheels are more energy efficient and cheaper when it's flummoxed by a single stair? You don't work to develop a general purpose robot that then isn't general purpose. > Heck, even just buying one robot vacuum for each floor for an example is still way cheaper that a stupid humanoid robot. My robot vacuum hasn't managed to clean up any of my kids' toys yet. In fact, it just sucks up the first one, clogs itself, and aborts the vacuuming cycle until I dislodge the toy. Hardly the "gotcha" you seem to think it is.

Car manufacturing and every single industrial product is that way. Just because a welding arm is fancier than a transport belt that sorts boxes by imaging doesn't mean the latter it's not robotics. Nobody is crawling either under Tesla's Optimus either, just investors inflating Tesla stock. Right now they are still 2-5 years behind of matching humans for basic tasks, let alone the more complex ones that humans do in factories (quality control, maintenance, tech assembling...). When do you think one of these will be able to replace a human putting together an iPhone at Foxconn?

And that means your one robot can do one thing. You want it to deliver something for you? You're without your robot for an hour, like sending your phone out on an errand, now you have no phone. Would you like to get rid of all the other robots you use so it can do the work they all do? Washing machine, dryer, dishwasher, all robots with their own motors and gears so they can work at the same time, but stretching your analogy out, those should have hand cranks so your robot can operate them using human interfacing because it's a human world. It's not and we are not a great design to copy.

Yeah and my point is that general purpose robots have so far only proven to be garbage.

Name one technological improvement that didn’t start out like that in the eyes of some detractor?

Thats… what theyre trying to improve. Imagine if every inventor/engineer had your mentality

Right, it makes no sense. Humanoid robots offer more utility overall even if it technically may be slower or less efficient than a dedicated machine.

Seriously lol. There are two types of people. Those who get it, and those who don’t. Those who get it invest in Tesla because they see the vision

Reality usually starts as a dream

Cool story. So how much did you short the stock?

It's going to be very entertaining, watching all of you figure out whats about to happen as it actually happens. If you think He's full of shit, please short the stock. Put your money where your mouth is.

The only reason I would invest in Tesla now given these investors want Elon to have a $1 trillion pay is the immortal army of robots fighting a war. An entire army division.

The shape and form of the B2 was derivatived by computational analysis aimed at minimizing radar returns while maximizing size and payload; not by copying a biological system. There are shapes and features imposed by the laws of physics for the most efficient travel. The same is true for subs and fish. Beyond an overall shape a B2 bomber and a peregrine falcon have very little in common. Peregrines like all birds have dynamic, foldable wings, whereas B2s have fixed wings.

>There's Chinese robots you can buy right now for 15k. How many human workers have been replaced by said 15k robot? If you just want a robot in humanoid form there are ones far cheaper than that. The humanoid robot vision is that they will be able to build a robot capable of replacing humans in many jobs. To do so they have to be far more capable. More importantly the fundamental issue is not the cost of the hardware. A humanoid robot that requires 40 servos will always be more expensive than a dedicated robot that only requires one. >The hardware is not expensive. A servo is like $15 on digikey Good servos with accurate encoder and force control loops are not inexpensive.

It's not about replacing jobs RIGHT NOW. It's about in 5 years, 10 years, can these robots do 25% as good as a job as a person? Because if they can, it's over. Those $15 servos all have encoders as good as anything in them. The generic servos are like $8. These things are mass manufactured. A single PCB can do force control for like 50+ servomotors.

Good chain of thought problem is you didn't continue it. Eventually your trash trucks are going to break down as will your humanoid robots. At that point you are going to have buy new trucks. As you said an autonomous trash truck would be better. It will be cheaper, last-longer, and more effective. So basically your humanoid robot is just a stop-gap measure for the more optimal solution. Of course that assumes that such a humanoid robot exists right now. Just look at Tesla themselves. They can try to build Optimus robots to drive their model Y in their robotaxis service. Instead they went with the autonomous model Y. It is the cheaper, more reliable, more efficient solution. More importantly the autonomous car is able to leverage far better sensors and computing power that is available to a car, but would not be would be available on a humanoid platform. The question is why would any other industry be different?

Compute would be tiny once the model is built. You can have an embedded AI model run on your apple watch for hours.

[deleted]

what did their comment have to do with shorting a stock?

They will just move the goalpost. “yeah it’s easy to fold clothes, but it still cannot replace my plumber“.

The neighbors Roomba-4000 is mowing the lawn at 3 am again.

I recently saw one of these robots fail to walk up the steps, fall to the ground and completely spazz out before someone had to knock it dead. Yeah it’ll surely be great. /s

It aint much but its honest work. Feels great to take money from delusional Musk fans.

That wheel means you just screwed yourself out of every environment with stairs. While a task specific robot can definitely be more efficient, it is also more limited. If you change your process, that $10 million super robot you specifically built for that one purpose now becomes the world's largest paperweight. What you are not seeing is that having a humanoid robot framework turns a hardware problem into a software problem. The last time we did this on a large scale was when computers stopped being something that were built for a single purpose and became general purpose machines. When the hardware is a given and taken care of by some massive corporation, it opens up the space for small garage companies to develop software.

Because now I can sell those humanoid robots to literally anyone else in any other industry. I cannot do that if I have a specific purpose built robot. Now the car is probably a really bad example, because it is also so ubiquitous and Teslas are already just computers with a frame built around them, and is also general enough to be something that can be bought and sold nearly on a whim. You are not wrong that humanoid robots are a stop gap. They absolutely are. They are the step we need to move from a world built and maintained by humans to a world built and maintained by robots. You can dream of jumping straight to the end of the process, but that is not going to happen. Getting to a higher automation level will remain bottlenecked because the jump from "process that is made for humans to do" to "process that is completely automated" is too big. 50 to 100 years after humanoid robots have effectively taken over nearly every task, they themselves will have been replaced by more specific robots that are somewhere else on the generic-specific range, with processes that will be completely impossible for humans to even begin to take part in.

Any sympathy I had towards any argument you were going to make went out the window when you made a personal insult.

The shape and form of the B2 started in the early 1900's with its early predecessors, and I'll be shocked if seeing a bid in flight didn't lend help to the flying wing design. Call the B2 and peregrine falcon converging evolution of flight if you want, but the root of flight is biomimicry.

No biomimicry was pursued in the early days of aviation. Designs with dynamic flapping wings were pursued. The thing is that once scientists learned the basic mathematics that allowed birds to fly they realized that flapping wings were not necessary for flight at all. Fixed wings with flaps and other much smaller control surfaces would do just fine. Remember in engineering there are no gains for needless complexity. The simpler less complex solution will almost always win out over the more complicated solution.

A wing is biomimcry.

Human looking robot =! Human acting robot. The hardware for walking around is reasonable expensive, the hardware required to actually do work is enormously expensive.

I think japan is more ahead when it comes to robot. So i do not think Musk can sell anything there

But it does not needs to be humanoid for the job, like the dish washer

Yeah maybe training it is expensive but actually deploying it can be run with very little power

I suggest looking into why so much stuff looks the way it is You dont consider it biomimicry becose it has become normal and you dont think about it that way Why do planes use wings at all? Why do they have tails? Flying wings are more efficent and iirc gyrocopters dont use wings Why does the pre aim9x seeker point towards its target? Why is a bullet shaped iirc like some birds beak ?

>they take mature and sometimes nearly mature technologies and figure out how to produce them on a massive scale. >SpaceX have been great at this Just no Reusability wasnt anywhere near mature before spacex It was touted as impossible to do or impossible to do cheap And verticaly landing a rocket? The only thing that did it was a weird nasa subscale SSTO prototype Spacex didnt figure out how to manufacture rockets on a massive scale Rocket 3 was supposed to be that before it failed Spacdx was about reuseing it, before it was cknsidered a 50s scifi joke of an idea

The thinking is basicly put your money where your mouth is

If one thing Japan doesn't lack is capable robots... heck they own the research market from simple arms to advanced humanoid one

Maybe in 5-10 years.

We have hundreds of workers for you, we are rounding them up, as we speak.

Did you hear the wind talking?

We had a robot craze in the 80s,largely fueled by Star Wars and r2d2... Does no one remember Rocky IV? It was dumb then and it's dumb now. Even if we came up with perfect humanoid robots (which is also dumb for a number of reasons), we'd be stuck on how to power them. Arc reactors are fiction, and AI without a body already takes massive amounts of power. Are we going to hardwire these robots to our home/factory panel? That's going to be a lot of loose wiring.

Yes. That is one he did not deliver. Here are some he did. If you look at them, he has a fair share of delivering things wventually. Mind you, most of these are hard problems, it is not like promising Apple iPhone 15 and not delivering it. ### Delivered on Time (or close, with minor delays acceptable in context) - **Reusable Falcon 9 boosters** (promised ~2015, first landing 2015, routine by 2017–2018) — Delivered ahead of many expectations. - **Falcon Heavy launch** (promised mid-2010s, first flight 2018) — On schedule. - **Crew Dragon human spaceflight to ISS** (promised early 2020s, first crewed 2020) — Delivered on time. - **Starlink global internet beta** (promised 2020, public beta 2020–2021) — Delivered. - **Tesla Model Y production/delivery** (promised 2020, deliveries started 2020) — On time. - **Neuralink first human implant** (promised trials ~2020–2022, first implant 2024) — Slightly delayed but achieved. ### Delivered but Late - **Tesla Model 3 production/delivery** (unveiled 2016, volume production promised 2017–2018; high-volume delayed to 2019–2020) — ~2 year delay. - **Tesla Semi production** (unveiled 2017, production promised 2019; first deliveries 2022, volume ramp 2025+) — ~5–6 year delay. - **Cybertruck deliveries** (unveiled 2019, production promised late 2021; first deliveries Nov 2023) — ~2 year delay (features/price/spec reduced). - **Boring Company Vegas Loop operational** (concept 2017, first tunnel/loop promised ~2020; opened 2021, expanded since) — ~1–2 year delay. ### So Far Not Delivered (as of Nov 2025) - **Full Self-Driving (FSD) unsupervised / Level 5 autonomy** (promised "next year" annually since 2016; latest: unsupervised in 2025) — Ongoing delays, still supervised only. - **Tesla Robotaxi fleet / Cybercab production** (promised 1M robotaxis by 2020; Cybercab unveiled 2024, production "before 2027") — No operational unsupervised fleet. - **$25k affordable Tesla / Model 2** (promised 2020–2023, then H2 2025; reports of cancellation/shift to robotaxi focus in 2025) — Not delivered, possibly abandoned. - **Next-gen Tesla Roadster** (unveiled 2017, production promised 2020 → 2023 → 2024 → 2025 → now 2027) — ~7+ year delay, no deliveries. - **Hyperloop high-speed system** (whitepaper 2013, test tracks promised mid-2010s; concept abandoned/sold off ~2022) — Never built. - **Humans on Mars / Mars colony** (promised uncrewed 2022, crewed 2024–2026, colony "soon"; latest ~2029–2030s) — No humans landed. - **Optimus humanoid robot in factories / mass sales** (unveiled 2021, factory use 2025, sales 2026+) — Prototypes only, no mass production/sales yet. - **Neuralink advanced features** (e.g., vision restoration, telepathy; promised mid-2020s) — Basic implants done, advanced claims pending.

How are tele-operated robots going to help a country that doesn’t have enough people? People think they just because you build a human eye robot frame that somehow the intelligence comes along with it. Tesla has not demoed anything approaching the intelligence needed for its robots.

That professor was in the aeronautics department. A professor in the evolutionary biology department would have answered -- if evolution required a creature that could carry hundreds of itself long distances, it probably would have evolved to accomplish that! Biology does CRAZY things and have produced some ASTONISHING feats

Yeah, everyone knows two things: \- Why the human shape? \- Why the teleoperation? Other people have already addressed the first. But fewer people are addressing the second. Even just teleoperation would be revolutionary. There are so many tasks that could be done more efficiently or pleasantly or cheaper, offsite. Like emptying the cat's litterbox while I'm on vacation for a week, or doing road construction at night, or checking in hotel guests at odd hours (a technology that's being used alreadY)

The point was…’Everything evolves in context.’ A bird developed traits based off its needs for the environment it operates in, but for an airplane to simply be shaped like a bird and have feathers, a beak and legs just because biomimicry was the basis for the design would have been the incorrect approach to make the most efficient flying device for mankind, since our device doesn’t need feathers for insulation or to stay dry, our device doesn’t need a beak to eat or feet to clench a branch. Its point was not to insult or take away from biology at all.

I don't touch my steering wheel

A decade late is a crazy thing to defend. Some of the items haven't even materialized yet.