alt Hacker NewsI still don’t understand how this can be considered cheaper or more productive than using a human.
I’m all for automation in industry, but the "human simulation" approach (where a robot mimics a human on a production line instead of using a process optimized for machine operation) just doesn’t make sense to me.
Replies
menaerus • yesterday at 12:14 PM
It makes sense when you find out that there's only so much humans who want to do and are capable of doing that type of work. Also, robots are cheaper, and they are the opposite of humans - theyt are not emotional, lazy, feeling fatigue or any other spectrum of feelings or behavior ...
➕ show 1 reply
ReptileMan • yesterday at 11:44 AM
A cheap humanoid robots will do wonders to alleviate the need for migration. And they can be plugged anywhere you have existing humans working.
Most manufacturing operations have a long tail of stuff that is done by people because it's just not worth buying/designing a specialized machine for. That's exactly the stuff that people do currently that humanoid robots might step in and do cheaper.
Employees cost roughly 70-120K per year. A lot of work in automotive is skilled work that pays relatively well. So, the economic case is easy to understand.
That's why there are lots of companies trying to produce humanoid robots. If they get good enough, lots of companies would buy them. A humanoid robot costing about 100K that can work around the clock (minus charging, battery swaps, servicing, etc.) doing work that otherwise would be done by a person could earn itself back in well under a year. Maybe it will cost a bit more or a bit less.
Will they be able to do anything? Not right away probably. But they'll probably be able to do useful things which means people don't need to do these things and can do more valuable things with their time.