Tesla Optimus robot takes a suspicious tumble in new demo

Instead of handing out water bottles, it chose death.

[removed]

The more I think about it, the less I feel that robots need to be humanoid, especially for the applications you mentioned. Why do you need a humanoid robot to clean up Fukushima and why not just make an autonomous tank instead of putting a robot in there ( besides the point that the Ukraine war actually showed tanks have become obsolete due to drones) . You only need a robot to look and move like a human if they need to share spaces with humans and use equipment that's built for humans. For any other application, making them human is just putting unnecessary constraints.

Stuff like this make me smile

That's the main issue with all these robots people don't see. Why would I need a robot with legs that have tons of actuators that can break, when it's flat factory floor. They most idiotic idea was that optimus would perform surgery. There is no need for such robot to move at all. Humanoid hands are complete disadvantage. We have surgery robots now and they do surgery by doing tiny incisions through which they enter tools. Optimus would need same big cut that's needed for human surgeons. How is that good?

Why would he instantly remove the headset??! That's so dumb. Perhaps frustrated? Or was that a "reach for the head moment" (like a facepalm but on sides) and that's what we saw? Either way thats another fake demo. Old reliable Elon. Said so yesterday he fakes everything. Here we are. What a loser.

Tesla needs it to be humanoid to keep the fantasy going that 1, their one model is going to be everywhere and the solution to everything, and 2, for the average person to visualize the robot being a benefit to themselves personally. Imagine it performing surgery, and then oops the knife slipped because an *ankle* servo stopped stabilizing for half a second. The need for humanoid shapes is very small.

100% its tele operated. A robot dont fall backwards like this.

The only explanation I can think of is that fiction has conditioned everyone to think that robots are going to look like humans, but stronger and faster. So if you want to catch the attention of the layman, you build a humanoid robot. Other form factors are not sexy enough to sell.

This is what makes me think all this AI and robotics stuff is actually for the military and policing. The need for a humanoid robot is high in the military as you need to actually go into an area and search the buildings and selectively shoot people. And building structures are all architecturally designed around the human body.

If the goal was to sell a telepresence robot for dangerous situations, I think their demos are great. Unfortunately, they are basically trying to trick gullible people. This tech will be at minimum 10 years until it can do much in the way of useful tasks fully autonomously, which is still incredible, but they feel the need to be dishonest about it all and that’s the issue to me.

The person who wants a humanoid robot for domestic tasks is the same person who if slavery were legal they would own slaves.

Yes… why not 4-6or 8 arms with ten fingers each?….

Not sure what to conclude from a 5 second low quality video clip.

Fake demos... color me shocked

Reminds me of a little company called Nikola rolling their truck down a hill and saying it was moving on its own power…whatever happened to Nikola 🤔

There's nowhere a dog can't go that a human can't, and dog's are infinitely more stable on four feet than two. The human form is a fundamentally shitty design.

This should be investor fraud, and or the market should reprice, but i guess we are all gullible fools or at least forced to live and die by the gullible masses

I imagine something happened in the operator's room, like an alarm for his robot going off - a fault or battery drained. Whoop whoop, so he pulls up the headset to check just as the power cuts out. I don't think it was an instant reaction. It going limp but still having as much weight as a machine is a weird feeling. The arm lost control and it popped that water bottle.

That it was another fake demo is the obvious conclusion.

I used to work emergency management (radiological, actually) and you don't. I've made other replies about it, even in this sub I think, and I won't write my usual essay, but in short: 1. You want something with a low center of gravity. 2. You want something that isn't going to fall, trip, or stumble. 3. You want something that isn't going to have to duck, scramble, or climb in a questionable environment. 4. You want something as simple as possible. Rocker-bogie suspension, tracks and/or a bunch of wheels, low to the ground, a good remote manipulator instead of a dexterous human hand analog (and the wires and servos that go with it), and the simplest possible computer hardware to radiation-harden. Edit: humanoid rovers for this scenario are a pipe dream and a fantasy and a lie sold to people who might be interested in funding it. Edit 2: your tank analogy isn't really a bad one, except tanks are heavy. You also want it to be big enough to do its job but as small as possible. A tank-like design, though? Definitely. Most emergency management scenarios don't involve active combat, either so battlefield obsolescence of the tank isn't relevant - ideally your "clean up Fukushima" people and your armed forces should not be sharing the same space, although there are obviously plenty of contingencies where they have to.

Were you under the impression that Optimus is not teleoperated at all times?

How are the fanboys explaining this?

Rocker-bogie, heck yea

Humanoid hands are an advantage when your robot needs to do lots and lots of different things. However, they forget that if you put a robot in a factory, the constraints of space and time means that robot is most likely stuck doing one or two tasks at most, and humanoid hands are idiotic at that point. The only suitable place for a humanoid robot is the home, as a maid type appliance. But it's a long way before these hundred+ kg falling and kicking liability monsters are going to be allowed anywhere near an infant or child.

We essentially already have all the robots we need.

Elon still needs that dating robot tho

>This tech will be at minimum 10 years until it can do much in the way of useful tasks fully autonomously, which is still incredible There's been no progress at all so far towards that alleged goal. We don't know if they're even trying.

He wants to fuck a robot. Thats why he wants them to look like humans.

Pp

A dog can't open a cupboard. I mean, come on, there's thousands of places a human can access that a dog can't. That said, it's irrelevant, you can have dog robots also.

But it doesn't have to look like a dog. It just needs four legs, and then it can have four arms or eight hands or whatever. The humanoid form is totally unnecessary. Musk likes it because he saw it in a sci-fi film in the 1980s. That's the extent of his 'vision' for the future.

At this point, there are two kinds of tesla investors: those who have stock because they have an index fund that includes it and people that want Elon to pump the stock through any means necessary. I'm not sure any of them worry about a little fraud now and then.

It's not teleoperated at all times, though. Remember that embarrassing video where it was asked to get a Coke?

That's a big stretch lol

Think it was remote operated. When the operator took off his headset, the “Robot” followed, then dc’d.

10 years behind the competition, minimum

You're absolutely right that a humanoid robot is less effective than a specialized one for those specialized tasks. The main case, I think, for a humanoid robot is general purpose tasks. I already have a shovel, so a humanoid robot could in theory help me dig something. I have a vacuum, so it should be able to vacuum, etc. The humanoid robot wouldn't be as good as a specialized robots for these tasks, but I can't afford to buy a specialized robot for all of those tasks, but with this one robot I can perform a wide variety of tasks "pretty well". Anyone who would volunteer to be operated on by an Optimus robot doing surgery, must want to die.

Having a robot to begin testing and training on is great, using telepresence can build up a great training data set, but they are just flat out lying to investors in my opinion, because telepresence with autonomous in 10-20 years wouldn’t attract the insane valuations. I just don’t care for the dishonesty, but there are lots of uses for what looks to be a decent telepresence robot. If it would for example enable people with mobility issues to get a good paying job, or allow people to do dangerous tasks more safely. I doubt they are stronger than a human today, but building larger ones that are stronger than a human could allow humans to potentially carry and move heavier objects in some situations that might be difficult for a crane or similar item to do, or in radioactive places, or rescue. Those are all much smaller markets though, but they are the only realistic ones in the next 4-5 years.

$TSLA P/E of 300 is not fake. Elon Musk’s fake claims made it so.

I don’t see him stopping until they build one he can actually impregnate.

Elon just got his 1t package 4 Weeks ago. Give him time to rewrite all The Code that the best 10000 Engineers couldn write. It will Work …. Next year Like always

Their CEO declined to double down and swear that it really was a legitimate product demo, despite clear evidence to the contrary.

I showed my daughter some of the clips of [the Neo humanoid robot loading a dishwasher](https://youtu.be/f3c4mQty_so?si=QjgOOI29QM6Anx8s&t=157). She *immediately* clocked it as moving like somebody playing Job Simulator on a VR headset.

If the idea is that Tesla’s Optimus is going to replace human labor, then whatever price point Tesla sells them at is a tacit admission of the inherent value they believe the robot is worth in terms of labor over the lifetime of the robot. Which means for it to be true these robots are meant to replace labor then either the price point is exorbitantly high, the price is reasonable but the capable skill is rock bottom low, or it’s all a con and just an expensive toy. The moment these things are capable of highly skilled labor is the moment Tesla starts a wholly owned subsidiary making and doing Stuff at a high margin low labor cost profit, not selling these robots to other people so they can do it.

>That's the main issue with all these robots people don't see. >Why would I need a robot with legs that have tons of actuators that can break, when it's flat factory floor. Exactly. If the robot doesn't need to leave one location to do it's job, you bolt the thing to the floor and hook it up to mains power. If it does need to move around a factory, you can put it on a rail, or a wheeled base if you need a bit more flexibility. Any of the above scenarios completely avoid the (significant) challenge of making something that has to balance on two legs and walk around. There are *very few* environments/applications where a humanoid formfactor would be an advantage for a robot. The overwhelming majority of the time *not being constrained to a humanoid formfactor* is so much of an advantage that you can just get better results for a fraction of the cost by having multiple robots tailored to performing 1-2 tasks. But that isn't as "cool" and doesn't result in robot slaves for rich weirdos who misunderstood the science fiction they read growing up.

The straight-up lies about autonomy are getting out of hand.

And pets. But also the Robot has to be reliable. I would be hard to push for having one rather than small specialised robots for grass, cleaning, etc. Because if one goes down than that’s ok, only one think is not being done. If that big robot goes down then that is 20 things now not being done.

There's a reason why washing machines look the way they do, instead of Rosey the robot with a wash board. The robots would have to be damn near perfect in locomotion for a home, and don't forget most homes have stairs. There is zero chance I'm anywhere near the bottom of a set of stairs when one of these current gen robots is using it.

100%. Humanoid robots are an appeal to science-fiction hype. They are not a good solution to just about anything from an engineering standpoint and never will be. **Every** humanoid robot ever came about because someone wanted to build a humanoid robot, never because they surveyed all possible designs and that was the best one to perform the given tasks. That's why all the companies that are doing it are startups building hype. Even Boston Dynamics, who's produced a lot of cool stuff and garnered a ton of attention, hasn't actually sold almost anything, much less turned a profit in the decades they've been operating. In the meantime the actual manufacturers of industrial robots have turned over trillions in revenue and spend plenty of it on R&D. They're just not getting attention and hype now because they're focused on building robots that they can actually sell, that do actual industrial tasks better and more cost-efficiently, not a pipe dream of a humanoid robot butler. It's like the dang Hyperloop - if it's such a good idea why'd they need startups for it, why hadn't Alstom, Siemens and the other train builders gotten into it? Certainly not because it was a new and original idea, but because it's a bad idea. But these days those techbros just evade that question by calling themselves a 'disruptor', denouncing the existing industry as 'legacy' (profits are so _legacy!_ ) and are too stuck in an old mindset to see your brilliant 'new' idea that also happens to be so simple and obvious that you can easily build hype and attract investors for it. Hyperloop, Theranos, Solar freakin' Roadways...

Exactly, I've been working in manufacturing for the last 5 + years and I've started to understand how and why certain processes are automated and I've never seen a humanoid robot in there because there's no point in limiting yourself with something that looks pretty but can't do the job.

I realize that this rule may need to be revisited, considering the general tone of the comments on the post that you linked, but it is what it is for now. Could you please edit out the link? Just mention something like "the post about this on the Tesla Motors sub" without linking, and it will be fine. Thanks.

Maybe the headset exploded.

>Why do you need a humanoid robot to clean up Fukushima and why not just make an autonomous tank instead of putting a robot in there Because autonomous tanks are already a thing that exists. You can't really sell a fake product if what you are selling already exists.

1X actually says that their robot is teleoperated for now. It will still be teleoperated when they start selling it. They're hoping people will put up with that and it will give them enough training data for an AI.

well, if you really get down to brass tacks, no one wants to fuck a dog. You know they will take these robots, cover them in silicone tits, and turn them into $20k sexbots. So they'll either be killing machines for war, or sex bots in the home, or both depending on the software upgrade.

The cost of repair isn't the largest economic factor. It's the cost of liability. Who is responsible if one of these things falls over and crushes a pet? What if you send it out of the house and it crushes the neighbor's pet? Is the owner responsible? Is the manufacturer responsible? Does someone have to pay insurance for it? Would insurance companies even be willing to insure the current gen robots?

And I genuinely give them credit for being a lot more honest about the nature and capabilities of the product they're selling. I just find it hilarious just how much "Teleoperated via Meta Quest headset" ends up translating to what is basically a slower meatspace version of the type of VR game where you create chaos attempting to perform basic tasks.

Putting any faith whatsoever in people who've taught you that they're dishonest is...a choice. Tesla has poisoned this well for a generation. Whoever tries to actually pull this off better have their shit all the way together.

Gullible people who know that they're bad at things assume robots MUST be better than they are.

I could see Elmo insisting the robot make an "oh shit" gesture when suffering a catastrophic failure because making a funny video is more important than making a functioning robot.

good thing it wasn't feeding the baby. Or giving a prostate exam...

I know, South Africa was totally a non slavery culture

Fukushima is actually a good use case for a humanoid robot. The plant was designed for human maintenance and operation, with ladders and stairs in tight spaces, and locking mechanisms and other controls at chest height, and only minutes of operational lifespan before most robots will fail. A robot with tank treads is apt to get stuck in existing debris. Robots they have built usually have custom purpose-built actuators, like to apply torque to a wheel that needs to be rotated. A sophisticated humanoid robot would have a lot of the size and strength requirements for the tasks designed for humans, without needing so much customization. If you’re building a plant from scratch for robotic automation, even to work side by side with humans, they don’t need to be capable of performing tasks designed for humans. Amazon warehouses have tons of non-humanoid robots rolling around, bringing shelves to people, routing boxes between locations, and so on. They don’t need to worry about turning doorknobs meant for humans, or climbing stairs designed for humans…the plants were designed with those robots in mind.

What is the point of having a pet if a robot takes care of it? That just means you have a robot with a pet. Absolutely bonkers.

the thing is, a telepresence robot capable of doing fine work like an actual human would be one hell of a product for a variety of fields.

There's a reason why industrial robots have a cage around their operating range in which humans are not allowed to enter. The only robots allowed to work alongside humans are termed cobots and are made for specific applications where they can't harm (seriously injure) humans even if they malfunction.

Yes, but a robot for my house needs to be very general-purpose and use the tools I already have, otherwise I have to buy a bunch of different robots instead of just one. Same goes for the remaining human jobs in factories; anything that can keep a specialized robot busy doing it 24/7 is already done by a robot. I think Tesla is way behind on the AI side of robotics, but there's a reason dozens of companies are building these things now.

It doesn't have to look like a human, but so many spaces a robot like this might be needed are places designed for humans to work, so having something that can physically reach the same places is helpful. Of course, making a 1 foot tall robot would also be handy for certain applications. Or a fifteen foot tall version. There is no one size fits all solution, which is another thing these developers are failing to realize.

My friend, huge Tesla/Elon fanboy send me a video of the Optimus robot running. He’s amazed how human it looks and this is a sign of things to come. Then I remembered the Boston Dynamics group and how their robots can breakdance, do cartwheels, etc. I don’t understand how these fanboys can see how far behind Tesla is to other companies in areas like robotics, self driving taxis and think this guy is a genius leading the way in innovation.

Yeah. Tech companies are so bullish about sticking an AI in a humanoid robot that they forget to ask basic questions about OSHA regulations. Or common sense about safety at home.

>using telepresence can build up a great training data set But does it? Nothing ever comes of it.

Isn't that the whole ethos of the ' move fast and break things ' policy? Ask for forgiveness, not permission

How do you know it wasnt teleoperated then too. The operator was obviously just waiting for Grok to finish spewing its garbage before walking it to the kitchen.

Humans aren't things I'm willing to break.

Fair point, but the movement looked far clunkier than any of the teleoperated demos before that.

This may hurt a little, but it’s something you’ll get used to.  Relax, turn around, and take my hand…

There are lots of non-humanoid robots being successfully used at Fukushima.

For the most part, until around the pandemic, company stock valuations were based on real performance and financials. Coming out of the pandemic, it seems like more and more companies are massively gaming the stock market by hyperinflating their values based on vaporware products that don't yet exist, no one knows when they may, or if they ever will. Musk and the other tech billionaires have been pushing "disruptive products that will change the world overnight, available in just one year" every year since around 2017, all while being propped up by federal government subsidies. That strategy really started to payoff in 2020 when the FED and other world banks, along with multiple national government treasuries started flooding the economy with printed money, which of course primarily went to corporations. Just as disturbing as nearly Tesla's entire valuation seemingly being based on nothing more than vaporware and gaming index funds... it's this whole Nvidia AI round tripping play with hundreds of billions of dollars (if not trillions)... a play that's supposed to be illegal. The round tripping scheme seems to be going on with a large percentage of the Silicon Valley AI players, including Tesla and xAI. Possibly even SpaceX as well.

For all we know the other demos were speeded up or something. It's all fake and a scam.

Eh, I'm not going to say some things aren't faked and this whole thing isn't a scam, but there are many more fluid teleoperation examples from third parties at live demos that show Tesla can do pretty convincing teleoperation.

>Fukushima is actually a good use case for a humanoid robot. The plant was designed for human maintenance and operation, with ladders and stairs in tight spaces.. You make a good point, but even then, the plant exploded.. so you can say the human design is not holding anymore, maybe something like the robot-dog is more apt now to navigate debris covered rooms.

Fucking hell, their subreddit is saying it's an AI video, not real. I also saw this hilarious comment while I was in that sub: >MY is the most reliable car I have ever owned except for replacing the FSD computer for $2,300 after it was killed by a software update.

In the subreddit comments on this video, they are saying it's an AI video with no source. One also said that the event was called "Autonomy Visualized, not Autonomy Actualized". They're fucking mental.

A shovel is $15 at Home Depot. Tools that cost a tiny fraction of the robot itself aren't the reason to compromise/add complexity to the robot. If I solve vehicle autonomy, I order up a ditch digger robot that looks like a mini excavator for the day and have it delivered vs trying to see if my Optimus has enough cycles in its motors to survive a day of ditch digging without needing to send it out for service. Not to mention, who is going to hose the damned thing off before it tracks all that mud into the house?

>show Tesla can do pretty convincing teleoperation. Maybe not with this new hardware. Maybe there was a technical problem. We can't assume it wasn't teleoperated.

It's not possible. And paying a human is much cheaper anyway.

Don't get me wrong, this demo where the robot mimed lifting the visor before falling over was definitely teleoperation. But that's not to say every Optimus demo isn't, like the "get me a coke" video.

More that having such a robot in the house as unstable as the Optimus, with i hundred+ kg falling and crushing say infants, children or pets. But 2026 launch everybody says Elon....

We can't assume every single one is not teleoperated.

But that's not what happened here because Optimus is not even a robot. It's a remote controlled puppet.

Who is still falling for this? (Pun intended)

Conmen are coming out of the woodworks cause there are no consequences! No punishment!

Ohhh, gotcha - thanks for the clarification. (Still, I have to imagine that the kind of person who thinks an at-home roboslave sounds like a great idea is also the kind of person who's going to make that thing walk their dog.)

Funny, when [Adam Osborne](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_effect) did this it resulted in his company going bankrupt, quickly.

The shovel was one example - it could be pulling a wagon or using a weed eater or sweeping the floor taking out the trash to the curb or going to outside to cleanup dog poop in the yard. Im just saying, that's the argument. A general purpose humanoid robot can, in theory, do general purpose humanoid tasks. I have zero faith in Tesla and Optimus delivering anything useful for a reasonable price anytime soon - that's not my point. But the theoretical idea of a general purpose robot *obviously* has merit.

The reason is because Elon cannot imagine how to train any robot if it doesn't use a human operator to train the neural network. Why 2 hands of human length? Wouldn't a 360 swivel arm be infinitely more useful? Why stop at 2 arms? A 4-8 arm server robot can carry more stuff or plates to a table. Why walk and not wheels or treads? The answer, besides it's all always been vaporware to hype stock, is because if you do want to honestly train the robot to do these tasks, it would do so by collecting hours of human data performing the task, recording the movements, and doing reinforcement learning. If this was some other robotics company and not Elon, it would be a semi logical explanation for why you target 1-1 scale human mimicry. You couldn't train tentacle arms with a motion capture suit, but mocap is all he knows how to do. Improving on human design would require skill, expertise, creativity, and expert roboticists. Elon has no capability to conceive of a system that exceeds known capabilities, and fails to meet parity with any other state of the art system. And that's the story for rockets, self driving cars, brain control interfaces, tunnels, AI, and robots. It's always desperately claiming to be a leader in fields where he is last place in, tricking people because they don't know the leaderboards.

stock goes brrrrr

Even then, a general purpose robot doesn't need to have humanoid legs to move around and go up stairs for example. The argument that making the robot humanoid is a design constraint still stands.

There is a plan for those pesky OSHA regulations, similar to the EPA regulations.

Sure it wouldn't necessarily need legs as long as it navigates things like stairs, or be able to traverse all terrain that legs can traverse (e.g. very bumpy). It doesn't necessarily need five fingered hands either so long as it can manipulate tools that were designed for human hands. If that was your point, I agree - it doesn't have to perfectly replicate a human body. But it will likely still end up being somewhat humanoid only because the tasks it is doing were largely designed for humans. Of course there is marketing value for something humanoid too, but that's a diff topic... My main point was that, I agree something like surgery would never be done by such a general purpose robot -- but that there is still a huge use case for a general purpose robot that can replicate human abilities. I think Tesla is nowhere even close to this, BTW.

> minimum 10 years This is tesla we're talking about. They aren't ever going to have a usable product. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/23/elon-musk-celebrates-flawed-tesla-autonomy-day-with-employee-email.html

I have no details on what actually happened and would reserve judgement. I think the 'fan boy' (aka steel-man for Tesla) argument might be something like: The 'bot was trained by people wearing headsets and part of this training set thus includes the human operator taking off their headset. Particularly in the advent of something going wrong. Thus the 'bot is trained to take off (a non-existent headset) during failure. The article even pairs these concepts: \> Optimus faithfully replicated the motion of removing a non-existent headset as it crashed to the floor. Here’s a look at how Tesla trained Optimus with VR headsets in its lab:

At the start of the video, the robot looks to have been paused, or desynched from the operator. My guess is that while the operator's hands were down, they accidentally unpaused / re-enabled the connection. Since their hands were down and the robots were up, the robot synched to the operator's hand position, causing it to flail its arms down, hitting the one bottle so hard it pierced it and sprayed water out. The operator then lifted their arms to take the headset off, probably lifted it up and then moved it in front of themselves to put it down on a table... tilting it back in the process. The robot head and body position may be synched to the helmet position , so by tilting the helmet back, the robot's upper body followed suit and quickly bent backwards, falling over. If there were ever an example of why these robots need safeguards and why robotics companies need safety advisors if these are to work in close proximity to people, it's this. Had a person been handling the robot at that moment, thinking it had been decoupled from the operator, they could have gotten chopped by the robot's hand, which likely had significant torque behind it.

No Fukushima is a shit case the radioactivity would fry the electronics, which is what happened when they tried to use robots at Chernobyl. To work in that environment it would have to be shielded so much all the other performance necessities would be impaired to make the thing useless

It will absolutely fry the electronics. Last I heard of their efforts, which was a few years ago, there were still tasks robots were trying to carry out in the short time before their electronics fried. They don't need to be shielded to be long-lasting to do something useful.

[https://media.tenor.com/2twXPN9qSzoAAAAM/omfg-optout.gif](https://media.tenor.com/2twXPN9qSzoAAAAM/omfg-optout.gif)

It crushed that water bottle as it went dark

ironically he actually married an actress playing one (twice, even)

I for one think this is ready to perform 90% of surgeries in 2027

https://youtu.be/VTlV0Y5yAww?si=XY4slCQ6lNcea8Q5&t=51

2027? Pfft, today! Optimus can perform surgeries 5000% safer than a human being. Today! This is not a question mark!!

If you watch the initial hand movements in the video, it legit looks like it spilled something on its lap before it moved it's hands up to "remove" the headset and then subsequently fell over.

Something kinda sad about the way that things have come to be desensitized to everything what became of subtlety?

I want to have one to clean my cat’s litter box. Where are the tools I need to train the robot?

The founder was pardoned by Trump and is now suing his critics. Best timeline!

> They most idiotic idea was that optimus would perform surgery. There is no need for such robot to move at all. But Musk saw Star Wars and the medical droid 2-1B has legs. And probably some other pulp sci fi when he was a kid. Thus, they have legs.

Its as real as THERANOS evaluation... and NIKOLA... and ENRON...

If the root cause here is a spilled cup of coffee that would be... hilarious.

And calls it is...

I like my doctors to throw up their hands and fall on the ground right after they fruit ninja my heart.

*to drive a tank to face human guided ones aimed at the Ukraine.* Why would you do that? Tanks are expensive, even without humanoid robots, and as the Ukranian forces have shown, they're not all that useful. Design a drone with a reliable AI (i.e. not FSD) that can fly itself to the target and you'd have a much more militarily useful device. I still haven't heard of a single use case where a humanoid robot would be useful, other than perhaps care of the elderly, where the appearance does have some value. Everything else could be done better with a non-humanoid shape.

Is it Boston Robotics that has a demo showing a martial arts kick-jumping bot? Having a bot smart enough, agile enough, and responsive enough to train a real human in Ju-Jitsu would be useful -- if it didn't actually kill the student. My guess is something like that is far off. A human bot might have been useful at Chernobyl, too -- where the tasks are too varied, and the emergency too sudden for something purpose built. The bot could find radioactive bits and toss them into a lead bucket, and climb up a roof to do the same. I don't know if radiation hardening to the extent necessary is remotely possible -- among the bigger issues (dexterity, judgment, not falling over, battery life). How about a fire-fighting robot? Climb up a ladder and save the cat clinging to the window ledge. I totally get that humanoid robots in general are stupid -- but what I find weird is here I am -- making up (admittedly) far fetched scenarios that might justify initial sales of robots. And Tesla is not. What I'm suggesting is Tesla's apparent failure to: 1. Propose something a humanoid robot could do -- like one impervious to conditions of a house fire, and with vision optimized for seeing through smoke, and trained particularly in detecting a baby left in a crib; and 2. Obtaining sales for it, or at least partnership with a major forest fire fighting service (or something) to help develop it is itself suspicious. It implies a lack of seriousness. "Don't worry -- our robots can do anything a human can do!" is ridiculous.

So when does Elmo go to jail for this? I guess never!

One of the professors emeritus in the MIT robotics department said that it is not advisable to get within 3 meters of a humanoid robot. He's the same guy who founded the iRobot company that makes the Roomba vacuums. Those have a very low center of gravity.

After seeing elon's work with X and grok, why would anyone invite a nazibot into their home?

Stock is going to make suspicious ATHs

fully self driving ~~car~~ robot in 1 year! promise

I’ve been going crazy having had this same thought a few years ago thinking how dumb it is to make robots like humans where there are so many other better mechanisms that can be used. Use a robot with wheels if it’s in flat surfaces, use a robot with propellers if it needs to fly or go in water, use a robot with 4 limbs and wheels to go over tougher terrain (The Unitree B2-W did this recently and works really well over tough terrain). https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X2UxtKLZnNo&pp=0gcJCR4Bo7VqN5tD

We already got non-human-like robots for 'dark' factorys. The reason we want to have human-like id beacause the world is optimized for humans, and same as llm's like chatgpt, we eant a one solves all solution. These robots can in theory worl in human work spaces and such are not restricted to singular specified work spaces which would make them more versatile. But there is a long way ahead of this and optimus is definitely not 'the one' xD That thing os compared to the actual competition simply a joke, another one of elons money grabs, and artifical hype generation. I did not see a single demonstration where they are not obviously remote controlled (and still failing terribly).

>A general purpose humanoid robot can, in theory, do general purpose humanoid tasks. Until the battery runs out which it will do in about 20 minutes. These things are just a con, nothing more.

Good points.

It doesn't have to mimic the human form to work in a human optimized space. You can put tracks on it instead of legs and get rid of so many complex actuators. You can make tracks that can go up stairs. This is just an easy one I can think of. There can be many more done if making it look humanoid is not a constraint. Making a versatile robot doesn't necessarily mean making it look and move like a human

You did not get the point. It is to make them able zo eork in diverse human work spaces WITHOUT changing anything about the workspace. Also it is it's own research field that for cooperative tasks like carrying something together, humans like to do it more with humanoid robots. So this is also about public acceptance of what is gona 'steal your jobs'.

I literally wrote in my comments that making them humanoid is just useful in making them more acceptable to work with humans. I'm still maintaining, that you don't need to be faithful to human form to build a robot that can use human tools and exist in a space created for humans. This requirement to look and also move like a human is a design constraint. Also, talking about cooperative tasks, manufacturing units already have cobots which are used to assist humans in tasks. There are a lot of applications right now where robots assist humans in specific tasks but they don't look like a human.

Yes, and studys show that humans do not like to perform tasks with these, that is all I am saying😅🤷‍♂️ No, they would not need to be completely humanoid, but they eould need to be human-like, they need hamds (which are the most difficult part), and legs as well, else I could think of a thousand places from the top of my head where they eould not be able to work, without changes... So the thing we would be able to scrap would be the head, but this basically has the sole purpose of making it look humanoid, which in turn makes it more likely to be accepted by humans🤔 And to tackle your last point, of course it is a design constraint, everything is a constraint in one way or another, but the goal of these is to specifically work in human optimized workspaces, which gave the constraint of a human like form to be as versatile as possible... There are a ton of other concepts for robots which do not have these constraints maybe you should focus on these if you are more interested in them💁‍♂️

That's exactly the reason why Tesla would never have sold a fleet of vehicles capable of being robotaxis. Musk was beating off all over the place about what incredible revenue sources these things were going to be, then was talking about selling them to private owners. All of his ideas are braindead and at this point, recycled from his own prior cons to boot.

John Johnston has put a video about this out: ["Tesla Optimus Hilariously Collapses! Is Elon Faking Autonomy?"](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7NJo2Ckbw0)

I see it as seeing the future through the lense of the present. Look at old sci-fi from 1880s. They predicted we would fly, but they only knew of birds flying and some hot air balloons, so they assumed whatever would make humans fly would have large flapping wings.

Why don’t they just build cars? At one point they had a shot of totally dominating the EV industry. They’ve blown this thoroughly with these pie in the sky distractions.

So if or when this happens what will us humans do than and get money we be all claiming from the goverment so actally the human race and Ellon musk have basixkly created something to doom the entire world

Any glitch is possible, really. One possibility is that the VR displays could have gone completely dark or white - that can be disorienting and the natural reaction is going to be to pull it off right away. Or they saw the impending fall and, similar thing, reflex is to get out of there. Or they got indication the feed was cut so they pulled it, not aware that their motion was still tracked.

THAT is the trillion dollar question. There probably is an answer: cars are low margin, in a super-competitive business, and by themselves not a glamorous fantasy (the way a personal robot seems to be). \> they had a shot The did! "WHAT IF" Tesla had focused on the planned "Model 2" -- new manufacturing techniques, $25000 car. "WHAT IF" it spent more money in developing better batteries? For that matter, what if it came out with genuinely new models at even half the rate of BYD? The Model 3 was revealed 10 years ago, and became a huge success - a historic achievement redefining the car market and all the many consequences from that (to air quality, to international competition, to oil production). But ever decision since then seems grandiose, and wrong. The cybertruck is deservedly hated, but not everything about it is wrong. A Model 2 could have Cybtertruck's steer-by-wire, for example, and it's greatly innovative simplified wiring system. Add semi-solid batteries from a Chinese battery company (or one of the USA hopefuls who seem further behind) and the Model 2 could be best most evolutionary car yet. Add some manual controls and a pop-up display for the driver and Tesla would be back in the game, big time. It should have been released 5 years ago. But instead, billions on Dojo, which gets canceled.

People need to feel useful -- and ARE useful in a way I think AI never will be. But, yeah -- let's say full self driving works, at least on major highways. That's 1.5 million truck drivers out of work. What are the plans to help them? If it's any comfort, in 1971 I took a college course called the "History of the Future." It was a serous course, but necessarily speculative. We considered how the work week declined from 6 days a week to 5 and down to 40 hours a week. That trend was anticipated to continue. The problem of the future, we were told, is what would people do with all their free time. Ha! People work more hours than ever now.

50% of people are below average intelligence

Those robots are humanoid alright!

Yeah but let's just say every company went and did ai and laid everyone off no money to spend on things so company's would go in a way this is like I robots

No problem. Musk's robots can do anything a human can do -- no reason that can't include midnight purchasing frenzies on Amazon, etc. so soon humanity can be liberated from consumer behavior too. The only thing left for humans will be eating candy.

Humanoid robots will fail [https://gio.page/why-humanoid-robots-will-inevitably-fail](https://gio.page/why-humanoid-robots-will-inevitably-fail)