Tesla went into humanoid robots because they noticed what kind of thing was their AI architecture developing into.

They realized just how much of what an autonomous vehicle needs to do to navigate real world roads is similar to what an advanced robot would need to do to operate in real world environments. If they could get anywhere close to solving FSD, it would be an "in" on advanced robotics too.

The triumph of LLMs then made it glaringly obvious that the kind of advanced decision-making that you would need to power truly universal robots is no longer in the realm of science fiction, so a lot more companies followed.

▲

Animats a day ago | parent | next [-]

> Tesla went into humanoid robots because they noticed what kind of thing their AI architecture was developing into.

Tesla went into humanoid robots to pump the stock. Musk recently claimed that 80% of Tesla's value is in Optimus.[1]

(What is it with US auto company management? Tesla did well for a while, then Musk got distracted. No new models in years, and the Cybertruck turned out to be a dud. Stellantis has cut Chrysler down to one line of mini-vans, raised prices on everything, and messed up Jeep, which killed sales. The dealers demanded the CEO be fired, which was done. GM is being GM, plugging along. The CEO of Ford seems to have a clue. He got a BYD car to drive around and has been telling everybody that Ford has to get that good and that cheap, and fast, which they are trying to do.)

[1] https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/the-story-of-optim...

▲

bbarnett 21 hours ago | parent [-]

Tesla went into humanoid robots to pump the stock.

Everything else in your comment is more locked to direct observable info.

However this really isn't. And frankly every CEO wants a healthy stock price, that doesn't mean the primary goal is "pump the stock", which is what you are stating is the goal here.

That said, the Chrysler/Stellantis thing is just weirdosville. One thing I liked was this new platform:

https://www.caranddriver.com/ram/1500-ramcharger

but:

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a64781518/ram-ramcharger-1...

They put all that work into it, hype, pre-launch, and it's even built on a common platform. The truck is basically the same as their pure-electric version, as the engine is simply used as a generator to charge. No major changes to the rest of the vehicle, just an added engine.

You may wonder why I like this? Well I was hoping it's carry over to smaller Jeeps or even cars. I live in a rural area, and it gets quite cold here (-40C sometimes), which really reduces range. I want a PHEV, but also with a backup power plant.

This is that.

It also reduces a lot of the complexity of a hybrid. No dual drive train, or one part driven by gas engine, the other electric.

I can see myself driving much of the summer with the engine only coming on rarely, but then needing the engine more and more in the winter. But at least I'd be on battery most of the time, even then.

Heck, I can drive 100s of km without there being a fast charger here.

We need bridge vehicles for the time being.

But my rambling really goes back to, they developed the platform, started selling it, but held off on this final piece because of.. reasons?

Weirdos.

	▲	Animats 8 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> Tesla went into humanoid robots to pump the stock. Everything else in your comment is more locked to direct observable info. However this really isn't. Musk says it is: "Tesla CEO Elon Musk said on X that about 80% of his automaker’s value will come from Optimus humanoid robots. Musk said in mid-2024 that Optimus robots could make Tesla a $25 trillion company, equal to more than half the value of the S&P 500 at the time of his comment."[1] I'd like a good $35,000 electric Jeep myself. [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2025/09/02/musk-tesla-value-optimus-rob...

▲

numpad0 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Elon wanted to automate final assembly. Final assembly in cars is anything but final; it's most of what regular people consider "building" phase of the car where the body on a cart rolls forward and human workers attach parts to it until it rolls off at the end.

A lot of final assembly processes are already highly automated, albeit with human hands as tip of robots. Heavy objects such as entire assembled dashboard spanning an entire width of the car, or seats complete with headrest, are slid in from side riding on a carriage, often following a human hand that route cables and to confirm alignments for attachment.

Joint wears of worker humans embedded in the processes as robots are tracked and managed as well, by computer simulation, data tracking, and optimization.

Tool used, such as drills, are highly computerized as well, automatically setting and logging turns and torques, types and numbers of screws removed from the workstation shelf, etc., but they are still manipulated and articulaed by humans, as robots aren't good enough.

Robotizing final assembly is the holy grail for which Honda was doing robots since late 80s until Japanese economy collapsed and AI researches stopped. Steve Jobs was dreaming the same lights-out factory concept during NeXT years. More recently, Foxconn bought robots in hundreds at one point in hope that it will be useful for iPhone. Sony actually shipped some numbers of PS4 from a fully robotized prototype line.

The difference between them and Tesla is that they're so far the latest and about the least actually committed to it, obviously due to lack of engineering talent outside of UI software.