top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 118 points 1 month ago (15 children)

In spite of the demonstration videos of robots running and jumping and carrying boxes and slowly sorting packages, none of them are anywhere close to being ready to handle construction jobs, or most manufacturing jobs. And, they can't design or make the machines that automate the processes.

It's a billionaire's dream that this is happening now, it's not. One of the major hurdles is power consumption, as we're all seeing while they build out these "data centers". Robots and computers cannot match the efficiency and self-sufficiency of a human. In a picture:

  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 67 points 1 month ago (7 children)

    Yep. I work in prosthetics, people tend to overestimate current battery technology and underestimate how much energy it takes to move around a couple hundred pounds.

    Even with batteries that cost a small fortune, we haven't been able to create a lower limb powered prosthetic that can keep up with the human body for more than a couple hours.

    There's a lot of hype about the humanoid robotics coming out of China, but most everything is just marketing science fiction. Once you factor in the initial cost, power consumption for processing data, multiple batteries per unit, and the massive amount of general maintenance...... It becomes pretty apparent that things aren't going to pan out anytime soon.

    I build limbs out of reinforced carbon fiber and titanium and even those acquire a ton of wear in a relatively small amount of time. Any bipedal robot with plastic parts, made to do intensive labour is going to start falling apart almost immediately. The human body takes a ton of damage throughout the day as well, but it's self repairing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Interesting take. I guess I just realized every video we've ever seen of humanoid robots had been them doing something for a few minutes. But you never hear of one doing anything for days, months or years outside of science fiction.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 24 points 1 month ago

    Bipedal robots are kinda stuck in between a design flaw of what we want robots to look like, what we want robots to do, and what our technology is currently able to do.

    Bipedal locomotion is just not the most efficient or simple mode of mobility for things like a flat factory floor, it's really only efficient when you are factoring unleveled ground. We just currently don't have the technology that allows bipedal efficiency across all terrain. That would require a synergistic system of optics and something that mimic propeoception. That's a ton of information being sent from a vast network of sensory input being sorted out by your spine and brain in real time.

    Imo robots for a factory floor should be on tracks or wheels. Attempting to design a robot that's good for everything is just going to lead to a robot that is good for nothing. In engineering design should be made to fit a solution, designing for form and then trying to find a solution that form can solve is backwards and typically leads to terrible outcomes.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 79 points 1 month ago (27 children)

    Nurses.

    Watch nurses next time you're in hospital. They do 8 million things, unprompted, throughout their day. Robots would blow their power load and collapse if they had to do a tenth the things nurses do.

  • source
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 1 month ago (10 children)

    Have you tried firing all the nurses and just not giving anyone healthcare?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 1 month ago (9 children)

    In the US, we just pay nurses shit and then treat them like shit. It's amazing we have any left.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • load more comments (7 replies)
  • [–] 20 points 1 month ago

    No, what will happen instead is they'll get rid of half of the nurses and the ones they keep will be responsible for 16 million things. My agency is going through it right now. They fired one of our APNs and gave all her duties to our other one. She's already overwhelmed to the point of crying in the office.

  • source
  • parent
  • Yeah; and insurance companies and healthcare orgs in the US are trying to sub out actual human healthcare providers with “specialist agents”, because PROFIT ÜBER ALLES.

    But also, that sounds absolutely ripe for a massive fucking class action lawsuit.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (10 replies)
    [–] 57 points 1 month ago (9 children)

    It was supposed to cure cancer and other diseases, not make us homeless and surveil us.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    "It" is very ill defined. The AI they are selling you was never supposed to cure cancer. It was meant to make money. The AI which cures cancers is of a completely different kind than LLMs and media generation. And it does not have any of the same drawbacks nor any of the same funding despite it's far greater usefulness.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    The AI which cures cancers is architecturally pretty similar to LLMs in that it's based on transformers and GPT in particular is also based on transformers (that's the T in GPT). It is also generative AI, you give it tokens that describe proteins and it generates folding structures. It's like an LLM except the tokens aren't words or syllables like in LLMs.

    It's used very differently and the energy cost is a few orders of magnitude less (you can run it on a single H200 with 141 GB VRAM for ~9000 tokens or an A100 or H100 for ~5000 according to this university and it even has a slow CPU/IO heavy first stage preparing everything so they can minimize the GPU time in stage 2).

    There is yet hope that such AI applications will eventually benefit from all the research that's been put into LLMs. Obviously not everything will carry over, but there may be architectural improvements to be made in research models too.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 31 points 1 month ago (6 children)

    We always think of not working as something negative, we should desire not having to work and machines giving us the opportunity to do so. But the system is scuffed and capitalism works against us rather than for us.

    We need a new system where it's the goal to automate everything and then we only have to work a few hours a week and spend the rest with our loved ones, getting good at a hobby, enjoying life, singing dancing creating art all the fun stuff.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 16 points 1 month ago (29 children)

    I remember when it was just as laughable for a phone to dial itself, anything to update itself, computers to write code, etc.

    This doesn't show that AI won't eventually be constructing buildings. It just shows you're laughing that a thing that's pretty much certain to happen will never be possible.

    Yeah, robotics and AI aren't at a point where they can build a row of houses with zero humans involved... that doesn't say that won't happen "eventually."

    The vast majority of technology we use daily was unrealistic science fiction just 50 years ago and completely insane to consider much farther back than that.

  • source
  • hideshow 29 child comments
  • load more comments (29 replies)
    [–] 16 points 1 month ago (5 children)

    All jobs like this are going to pay minimum wage once the rest of the workers are replaced with AI and there are lines of people willing to work for no money.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    I implore young people to get into ai resistant fields and push for a return to basics and inefficiency.

    I'm almost 49 and my exit plan from my corporate job is to have a small farm just big enough that it can be run simply with man power alone and then market to a premium.

    Humans are not meant to be machines. Inefficiency needs to be valued more than it is.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 14 points 1 month ago (10 children)

    Increasingly, they're trying to get it to design the building.

    I'm having to double-check credentials in my plan reviews because contractors have started turning in plans with AI-generated architect and engineering stamps because they don't want to pay a professional to prepare their plans.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • load more comments (10 replies)
    [–] 12 points 1 month ago (7 children)

    Construction will be 1000% automated in the future. It's already happening slowly.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 10 points 1 month ago (26 children)

    mid process photo of a house being 3D printed

    Yes, this house is being 3D printed out of concrete.

  • source
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 53 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

    That's just the shell. Electrical, plumbing, HVAC, cabinets, roof--the rest is still built by hand and no, robots can't do it.

    Also, 3D printed buildings are failing, and very few have been built, they're just experimental. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRLqld_jD_g

    Maybe eventually, but I doubt we'll see a house built entirely by machines from the bare ground, with the sewer and water system, electrical grid, roads, sidewalks street lights, etc. installed, to hand-over-the-key ready in our lifetimes.

    I think many people imagine this is just around the corner is because they don't have a clue what goes into such a project.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (15 replies)
    [–] 9 points 1 month ago

    If I'm reading these comments correctly, I sould be seeking a late career change to a trade of some sort. I've haven't seen a robot plumb a shitter (yet).

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 1 month ago (7 children)

    ...this assumes that no one will ever connect LLMs to machinery, or generate code to run machinery (gcode, for example)?

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 8 points 1 month ago (13 children)

    This is true in 2026. I bet at one point, auto workers had the same kind of thoughts about how robots could never build a whole car.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    The robots still can't.

    And while the amount of automation is forever increasing, there's still certain tasks that are extremely difficult to automate. The problem is, those difficult to automate processes are often hilariously easy for humans to do. Robots are great at doing the exact same thing over and over, but throw any variability into the mix, and it's very difficult to make them able to adapt to it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 8 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    I was at enough construction sites to know it would be quite trivial to automate at least laying bricks with some programmable robots. Less skilled workers are already taught on the construction sites how it's done, to help out masons. Same with roof tiles, you only need to look out for chimneys and edges.

    And in our hellscape, it will just lead to forcing out a large portion of workers, make them work even more for even less, then a second round of layoffs can go.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›