Okay but I do kinda wanna watch em kickbox more lmao that’s ridiculous
Humanizing and accustomizing
Yeah, and horseless carriages beat humans over 100m more than a century ago.
Feels like “beating human records” is pretty meaningless for things that are… not human. I was intrigued to see what the entry criteria were since these are meant to be humanoid, but couldn’t find any real information on it.
Next thing they’ll tell us is that motorcycles are faster than people-powered bicycles…
While i largely agree with your point, I’m sure the fact they can run faster than any human is of interest to various militarys.
No. The military already has drones that are far cheaper and faster than these pointless clunkers.
Being able to balance and move realistically as a bipedal with speed is quite the feat though.
Newsflash, cars drive faster than humans run. Planes fly higher than humans jump.
You have no sense of wonder or imagination, do you? We have been making robots for decades, and this is the first time we have ever made humanoid ones which is able to outperform actual humans in this way. At last year’s robot games, the highest one was able to jump was under a meter, and now they can beat the human world record of 2.45 meters.
That’s absolutely phenomenal engineering, and it’s completely reductive to equate it to completely different technologies that exist to solve completely different problems. It’s phenomenal in the same way that it was phenomenal when we created the first chess bot that a human was unable to defeat.
You have no concern for the future of humanity, do you?
Maybe there are better things to waste resources on than pointless clunker that nobody wants or needs.
Even if computerized chess were some kind of major achievement (it’s not), it wasn’t the massive waste of energy, resources, and hype that this nonsense is.
Maybe there are better things to waste resources on than pointless clunker that nobody wants or needs.
Do you not comprehend just how many inventions are made because of progress in other technology? These balancing mechanics and pistons to be locomotive in a bidpedal fashion has previously been impossible. Now who knows what the future holds.
But people with attitude like yours will prevent all progress because you just can’t see the need? This is how funding gets slashed and you get what’s happening in places like the US.
That computer chess bot lead to other technology, you’re incredibly ignorant, it was a massive achievement in the field, how can you not see that? Because you can’t think of how it will directly affect t your life? Why would that even matter? That selfish?
A biped car would be so easy to parallel park
You mean a motorbike?
Sooooooo you’ve got a heart transplant to get into the middle of a dense forest during a war, there’s too much flak for air support, and a vehicle would go at a snails pace.
Would you rather die because technology didn’t advance to allow a robot to be able to run through the forest at breakneck speed because planes exist? Or should we be trying to advance technology at every barrier because there’s other situations where those just don’t make a lick of fucking sense.
There’s obviously contextual situations where a plane and vehicle don’t make sense, but sure let’s inhibit progress for… whatever reason you think you’re making here….?
Cool fantasy if you’re a billionaire. The rest of us are dying in that “dense forest”. jfc.
I just want health care. I don’t give a shit about these dumb clunkers and their imaginary heroics.
That’s just one example, there’s others as well, but obviously you’re gonna miss that if you are biased as hell like that and can’t think for yourself.
I’m sorry that you can’t see the point because you’re too wrapped up in irrelevant details. It’s a metaphor, but of course something like that would get lost on someone who just wants to bitch about any progress.
Did you seriously think that was a realistic usecase? They provided an example, don’t focus on the details, they are irrelevant to the overall point about progress.
I bet they can’t vomit and then eat the vomit though
Even my stupid puppy can do that
But can YOU?
Am I allowed to put Tabasco on it?
Only if you put it on before it came back out
Its a glorified RC car…
So they have the same weakness with everything that run fast: stopping and obstacle avoiding, and can be defeated by tripping 📝
Big deal. My Toyota Celica beat Bolt’s record too.
People should be concerned. Robots like these may be deployed against Taiwan in the next few years.
“Against” Taiwan… Or “for” Taiwan… Probably both since neither empire really gives a shit about the Taiwanese.
Battery life maybe an issue.
Probably good for an hour
She might say that would also be an improvement over humans.
China is training robot soldiers. We should start developing EMPs.
Or maybe stop threatening and invading the other side of the planet? Pursue mutually beneficial research and trade instead?
I’m sure USA can do it. \s \s \s
DEPLOY THE TREBEUCHET. Maybe Einstein was correct to say no matter what ww3 will be fought with, ww4 will be sticks n stones.
The real answer is drones currently. Small, agile, cheap. What advantage does a humanoid robot have over drones?
Here is the real answer. You can annihilate the living hell out of somewhere with drones, missiles, nukes. But unless you have actual boots on the ground defending the position you’re in, that is not claimed territory.
Humanoid robots controlled by humans or AI, can defend territory until human troops secure an area and setup defenses.
Now let’s get going with that EMP!!!
There’s no reason that violent control needs to take a humanoid shape.
The empire can control people by murdering them with drones much more easily than murdering with “humanoids”.
What advantage does a humanoid robot have over drones?
Another revenue stream for the grift economy.
- carry objects around
- can actually lift meaningful amounts of weight
- probably has fingers and can rotate screws in etc.
- can probably operate tools that require fingers with more precision than mini-helicopters?
Objects are carried by UGVs, they can carry 200-300 kilograms while being pretty small, small UGVs can carry up to 100 kilos with size of ~1m in every dimension. Unless you can explain to a very expensive and smart robot what you need to rotate and where and how to operate tools given, you’ll need a very competent pilot for these robots which with high probability would still be worse than dumbest of humans because they lack agility and require a lot of supportive infra to operate. Rich nations probably would try to make humanoid robots (like they did with robodogs) with questionable success.
Opening doors for example currently drones are very good at open field warfare but have problems with for example bunkers
Small ground drone on fiber optics that carry an antitank mine or a bomb can open doors alright. Also various artillery systems work great against static targets.
Yes but they can only open one door and that door doesnt even need to be enforced to be a problem and artillery is a very easy target for drones, because they are kinda easy to spot from air when they fire and are shown to be less and less effective.
You don’t really ‘need’ to open the door, it’s enough to destroy all exits. Question is how cheap you can make biped drone and how cheap you can make a small rover capableof moving 10-15 kilos of explosives. Rover can be made as cheap as <$500 or so.
Artillery includes rocket artillery, but even ‘regular’ gun artillery can shoot for tens of kilometers with specialised shells, while being mobile at that.
anecdote
I’ve been of the opinion that arty is basically guns but big nothing special about it, but whitnessing modern artillery piece work changed it considerably, while yes they are just big guns, but they are big guns. Like you feel it in your bones when it shoots.
With drones on your side you dont really need exits and artillery is one of the main casualties of drones because even fiber optics drones are now up to 50km in range. Rover drones currently have problems with 1 meter ditches because they can’t cross them. The question is always logistics and having a drone that can cross hard terrain is always better than one that can’t. That’s why hover drones are so effective. They are cheap and able to traverse every terrain in a big radius of operations
Well, you actually need exits unless your plan always was ‘die in a bunker without exits’.
hover drones aren’t all that cheap and require either very good
crpagnss antenna, or some kind of visual inertial odometry. Or you’ll get althold at best, which isn’t really hovering more like flying with the wind. Flying drones are effective because they are cheap, hovering drones (the multi-use ones) are prone to dying to kamikadze drones, they are big, loud, hot, and not very good at transporting things compared to rovers (logistics as you mentioned), one successfull delivery by rover compares to 10-20 deliveries by flying drone.Still not clear to me how exactly flying drone superiority when traversing hard terrain = bipedal robots are a good idea.
I’m pretty sure that a robot on wheels can open a door as easily as a robot on legs.
Yes but a robot on wheels has a lot more problems with terrain
Very gimmicky
deleted by creator
