▲ | Earw0rm 2 days ago | ||||||||||||||||
I can see that for the factory floor, but there's no particular reason for "it" to be "humanoid". It's basically a robot arm with mobility at that point, and if you need more than one, just have more than one robot wheel into place. There's no particular reason to have two arms.. one, or three, or five are all sensible numbers. Heck, a chassis supporting a variable number of arms and other appendages (sensors and so on) is plausible, and the control system looks more like an ant-colony mind than a human one. Which is a long-winded way of saying, there's no particular reason to link embodiment and cognition at the individual arm level in a factory scenario. | |||||||||||||||||
▲ | ACCount37 2 days ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||
On the factory floor, all the tasks that were a good fit for "a robot arm bolted down to the floor next to the assembly line" are already performed by robot arms bolted down to the floor next to the assembly line. What remains is all the weird and awkward automation-resistant tasks where "just get a human to do it" is still easier and cheaper than redesigning everything to maybe get old school automation to handle them. This is the kind of niche humanoid robots are currently aiming at. It's no coincidence that at least 3 companies trying to develop humanoid robots have ties to vehicle manufacturers. | |||||||||||||||||
|