Technology

60251 readers

5238 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

people who work in robotics, which one do you think is more efficient generally, polyped or biped? (self.technology)

submitted 1 week ago by Live_Let_Live to c/technology

25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I believe there's a big gap between flashy robot prototypes and commercially viable products.

Humanoid robots like Optimus often seem more about securing business contracts or generating publicity, while real-world applications usually require specialized, less advanced robots, like one-arm robots or Stretch.

The development of robots like Boston Dynamics' Spot tells us how long it takes to turn prototypes into practical products, and the transition from Handle to Stretch highlights the trade-offs between advanced demos and actual commercial viability.

I think humanoid robots are more of a long-term investment for future use in factories.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] just_another_person 22 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Humanoid robots make almost zero sense if you're talking about practical applications. Why would you make a robot bipedal, when there are more efficient (both in powerdraw and practicality) ways to allow them to move? It's slower, more demanding of sensors and sensors, and serves no purpose except to appear more human.

Robots design for their purpose are the only thing that makes practical sense. Even if multipurpose, bipedal still doesn't make sense on a factory floor.

[–] MimicJar 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I always figured bipedal was to make robots adapt to do things humans do where humans do things.

So for a factory floor, bipedal might not make sense. But what about delivering packages to houses? Navigating a home to help someone or collect something? These types of robots are designed to be general purpose.

If you own a factory or wearhouse, ideally you design them with robots in mind. Of course until you can do that something more generally purpose might be better.

[–] IphtashuFitz 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Exactly. I know folks that live on the 3rd floor of an old walk-up. Stairs are the only way in & out. So if you want to replace delivery people then it would need to be a robot that can navigate narrow & windy stairs.

[–] acosmichippo 1 points 6 days ago

i would still guess a purpose built robot to navigate stairs and carry a package would be better off with something other than two legs.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago

I think for household settings, a bipedal robot may be more ideal. Homes and the furniture inside are laid out according to the way humans move. That 2-foot space between the couch and The Good Chair that you walk between 20 times a day without any issue? A wheeled robot may struggle to navigate that, and may instead have to take a longer and slower route around the couch to get past. Got stairs in your house? Don't even get me started on trying to get a wheeled robot up the stairs. Bipedal bots would be more plug-and-play in these settings, and would require less supporting infrastructure.

But for commercial/industrial use cases, I think the mode of ambulation should be purpose-built to the task and setting.