Have you factored in the ability for humanoid robots to be able to do preventative maintenance and repairs on each other?

In many instances with repairing electronics and home appliances labour is the greatest cost, not the material. Sometimes it's as simple as replacing a 50 cent washer to repair something, or perhaps squirt some lube here or there regularly to prevent something from breaking down.

If it's the same for robot maintenance then robots being able to fix themselves and each other will change the equation on ownership tremendously.

Imagine if everyone had a domestic robot and if it broke down their neighbour's robot could repair it. That would be an extremely user friendly and cheap way to deal with the problem.

▲

sjsdaiuasgdia 2 days ago | parent [-]

This makes a lot of assumptions about the field service potential of humanoid robots. A humanoid robot is so much more complex than something like a washing machine. There are far more things to break. Assuming humanoid robot maintenance will look like general appliance maintenance may not be a robust assumption.

"Replace tiny parts" option - Which parts is the manufacturer making available for purchase and what does the supply chain look like for that? What tools are needed to do the disassembly, part installation, and re-assembly? Can a humanoid robot out in the real world replicate the clean room conditions in which delicate components were assembled then sealed inside some compartment so dust can never get to them? Are we going to put heat guns and soldering irons in the fingertips of every humanoid robot to support self repair? There's going to be problems that can't be resolved with the kinds of tools available in the average household.

"Replace modules / components" option - Having to buy a whole new hand when you really wanted to replace a single finger joint impacts the value proposition of self repair, it's not a 50 cent washer it's a $1000 pre-assembled component. The repair is now definitely doable in the field, at least.

You might also be assuming humanoid robot manufacturers would not work specifically against self-repair. They make more money if you buy a new robot, or you pay them to fix your broken robot. Maybe "fix this other robot" ends up on a list of forbidden tasks the robot will always refuse to do...

▲

Teever a day ago | parent [-]

That's the right way of thinking about it.

I think that you'd design it to use human tools as a bare minimum, so a soldering station, and a 3d printer, or even milling machines and lathes if needed.

But you're right, it'll be restricted from doing that. So the idea is you buy one, jailbreak it, and then get it to build a copy of itself.

It's like asking a genie for more wishes.

▲

sjsdaiuasgdia 19 hours ago | parent [-]

> get it to build a copy of itself.

Where does it get the billion dollar semiconductor fab to make the chips for the copy?

▲

Teever 14 hours ago | parent [-]

> get it to build a copy of itself.

Get it to assemble a copy of itself from a combination of available parts and anything else that it needs to manufacture from scratch.

▲

sjsdaiuasgdia 14 hours ago | parent [-]

What motivation does the manufacturer have to make those parts available to you?

▲

Teever 9 hours ago | parent [-]

It'll probably come down to a combination of regulation from an entity like the EU and the economic reality that it's easier to make a robot that has OEM parts that a consumer can access out of your supply chain.

	▲	sjsdaiuasgdia 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		You've retreated from "buy one humanoid robot and it can make as many more as you want from scratch, it's like asking a genie for free wishes" to "there could be a regulatory framework that would require the manufacturers of humanoid robots to make a retail parts pipeline that allows your humanoid robot to build another humanoid robot at a cost lower than what the manufacturer would sell one for." You didn't talk about the cost, but what's the point of having your robot assemble parts that the manufacturer will sell to you, assembled, at a lower price? It only makes sense if it's cheaper.