zlacker

"Given the state of robotics" reminds me a lot of what was said about llms and image/video models over the past 3 years. Considering how much llms improved, how long can robotics be in this state?

I have to think 3 years from now we will be having the same conversation about robots doing real physical labor.

"This is the worst they will ever be" feels more apt.

>>bearde+(OP)
but robotics had the means to do majority of the physical labour already - it's just not worth the money to replace humans, as human labour is cheap (and flexible - more than robots).

With knowledge work being less high-paying, physical labour supply should increase as well, which drops their price. This means it's actually less likely that the advent of LLM will make physical labour more automated.

>>bearde+(OP)
Robotics is coming FAST. Faster than LLM progress in my opinion.

>>Davidz+t7
Curious if you have any links about the rapid progression of robotics (as someone who is not educated on the topic).

It was my feeling with robotics that the more challenging aspect will be making them economically viable rather than simply the challenge of the task itself.

>>Davidz+t7
The question is how rapid the adoption is. The price of failure in the real world is much higher ($$$, environmental, physical risks) vs just "rebuild/regenerate" in the digital realm.

>>throw1+2B
Military adoption is probably a decent proxy indicator - and they are ready to hand the kill switch to autonomous robots

>>wh0kno+f8
I mentioned military in my reply to the sibling comment - that is the most ready example. What anduril and others are doing today may be sloppy, but it's moving very quickly.

>>bearde+ad1
Maybe. There the cost of failure again is low. Its easier to destroy than to create. Economic disruption to workers will take a bit longer I think.

Don't get me wrong; I hope that we do see it in physical work as well. There is more value to society there; and consists of work that is risky and/or hard to do - and is usually needed (food, shelter, etc). It also means that the disruption is an "everyone" problem rather than something that just affects those "intellectual" types.