101 points GaggiX 2 hours ago 55 comments
measurablefunc 2 hours ago | parent
Krei-se 1 hour ago | parent
I'm looking forward to robotics a lot because solving menial tasks will have a huge class impact as we can stop looking for ways to keep a portion of society suppressed and dumb.
One can dream, right?
andai 1 hour ago | parent
bigyabai 1 hour ago | parent
jfengel 1 hour ago | parent
I don't like utopianism and I'm certainly not going to plan on a best case scenario. But I can't help a tiny fraction of my brain that says "There are ways in which it could turn out well." Probably not, but the existence of a best case scenario feels like it should mean something.
fhars 1 hour ago | parent
andai 1 hour ago | parent
gradus_ad 1 hour ago | parent
fn-mote 1 hour ago | parent
rvz 1 hour ago | parent
Yeah I said it. Time to start the countdown timer.
dumberquestions 1 hour ago | parent
boshalfoshal 51 minutes ago | parent
2. However to argue against basically any other robotics startup, I think they would only be acquired if it was a robotics SW company _with real customer distribution_/revenue, or a robotics company focusing on HW that is worth acquiring the IP for. The problem with the latter is that it is also a huge cost, and that cost is only worth it if the ML side actually catches up to the HW. I don't think a frontier lab would want to sustain a full physical supply chain for a non-revenue additive product. And frankly, most robotics companies have no meaningful distribution/revenue or SW/HW IP that is worth acquiring, considering the cost.
dumberquestions 1 hour ago | parent
ajjenkins 1 hour ago | parent
Hopefully this is like the first GPT models and it gets better over time.
wand3r 1 hour ago | parent
ethanj8011 1 hour ago | parent
drum55 1 hour ago | parent
fn-mote 1 hour ago | parent
besterman23 1 hour ago | parent
But somehow this was pushed to the front page of HN before receiving a single comment with a title reminiscent of a major LLM release. Like I can only find 1 other reference historically to this lab and nobody noticed it or cared.
tgrowazay 1 hour ago | parent
jelloroll42 1 hour ago | parent
CamelCaseName 1 hour ago | parent
walrus01 1 hour ago | parent
GaggiX 1 hour ago | parent
I discovered the Robocurve benchmark after someone on X was saying that Kimi K3.1 Pro was performing particular bad on it.
Anyway I found the model particularly interesting because I think it's the first time I see an API for a random bimanual robot. Also HN removes "Introducing" so it's just the name of the model.
besterman23 1 hour ago | parent
However this comment got me thinking. Whats up with all the YC backed benchmarking companies? I know there’s only a few, but what is the business model for companies like Robocurve exactly?
computomatic 33 minutes ago | parent
besterman23 24 minutes ago | parent
Perhaps it’s purely for VC so they can judge which model is best? Also seems a little too conflict of interest-y, but that might just be too cynical.
smallerize 1 hour ago | parent
modeless 1 hour ago | parent
GaggiX 1 hour ago | parent
modeless 49 minutes ago | parent
Zero-shot task generalization is more interesting, but has been demonstrated by many other companies at this point, so it's not new. And it only becomes useful with high success rates on long-duration tasks, so demonstrating short zero-shot tasks with low success rates in toy environments is uninteresting.
What's hard and still unsolved in general-purpose robotics is doing real useful tasks end-to-end in real uncontrolled environments with high reliability. I guess there's just a lack of understanding generally about what's actually hard and useful in robotics.
fwlr 1 hour ago | parent
beernet 21 minutes ago | parent
jere 5 minutes ago | parent
Aurornis 1 hour ago | parent
Everything about this page strikes me as having been optimized for investors, not customers. Why would they cite a literal toy as a leading example of automation work? It doesn’t make any sense unless they’re maximizing for what investors remember seeing in headlines, not what actual automation customers would be interesting in paying for.
I think the product they’re selling is their equity, and their target customers are acquirers. The demos and the model feel like marketing material for that highly specific goal, but they forgot to include enough about how it could be useful to anyone.
hdz 59 minutes ago | parent
Folding laundry seems like one but then quickly falls apart the more I think about it. Not sure what else.
prometheus1992 1 hour ago | parent
we shouldn't aim for economies of scale on this problem as there are massive negative externalities attached to it. Hopefully, a chinese lab will release an open source version soon.
lifeisloving 1 hour ago | parent
Unironically there's lots of companies who will clean your house for free right now, but their staff get to wear cameras while they do it. People dont seem to care.
fn-mote 1 hour ago | parent
lifeisloving 57 minutes ago | parent
Im completely against all of this just fyi, but the capital owners are certainly going to try and cut out as many humans as possible. Get ready for lots of poverty, crime and generally a worse society in <20 years.
p1esk 52 minutes ago | parent
You rent a couple of robots who will build it for you for $3/hr.
saretup 1 hour ago | parent
amelius 1 hour ago | parent
plutomeetsyou 1 hour ago | parent
wolttam 1 hour ago | parent
fwlr 1 hour ago | parent
Once a robot can do everything an IQ 80 human can do, only better and cheaper, there will be no reason to employ IQ 80 humans. Once a robot can do everything an IQ 120 human can do, only better and cheaper, there will be no reason to employ IQ 120 humans. Once a robot can do everything an IQ 180 human can do, only better and cheaper, there will be no reason to employ humans at all, in the unlikely scenario that there are any left by that point.
Machines are making great progress on the IQ 180 front, and now with this it looks like they’ve opened a beachhead from the other direction too. Classic pincer move. In the earlier stages of the process, capitalism becomes more and more uncoupled from its previous job as an optimizer for human values. Now most humans are totally locked out of the group whose values capitalism optimizes for. They have no value to contribute as workers – and since in the absence of a spectacular social safety net it’s unclear how they would have much money – they have no value as customers either. Capitalism has passed them by. As the segment of humans who can be outcompeted by robots increases, capitalism passes by more and more people until eventually it locks out the human race entirely, once again in the vanishingly unlikely scenario that we are still around.
https://www.slatestarcodexabridged.com/Meditations-On-Molochamelius 1 hour ago | parent
dmje 1 hour ago | parent
amelius 1 hour ago | parent
GaggiX 1 hour ago | parent
atleastoptimal 1 hour ago | parent
arctic360 1 hour ago | parent
baalimago 55 minutes ago | parent