| ▲ | Chinese robot runs 100M sprint quicker than Usain Bolt's world record(theguardian.com) |
| 61 points by bookofjoe a day ago | 101 comments |
| |
|
| ▲ | kasperni 14 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| The live stream was here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOVNn1aRAIE Watching robot after robot being taken away on a stretcher was pretty funny. |
|
| ▲ | skeledrew 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| There will be no escape. Prepare to be outperformed in all the things. |
| |
| ▲ | qayxc 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Nah. What's often overlooked when seeing these (mostly) propaganda events is the fact that the actual autonomy of these machines is still lacking. We've had purpose-built machines that outperform every human at specific tasks for over a century now. Just because a subset that's popular these days (the "humanoid" and dog-like variants) invoke some psychological and cultural (we've been primed by media for over 150 years at this point) fears, doesn't make them more capable than they seem. Sure, the thing can run real fast, but looking at it, that's pretty much all it actually can do. In contrast to a boring old industrial robot, though, being able to win a half-marathon or a 100m dash against any hypothetical human isn't all that useful, no? | | |
| ▲ | skeledrew 15 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Of course it's still lacking. In contrast, how long does it take for a human to go from birth to being able to break any world records? How many years of dedication just to hone themself for that particular thing? And is a human breaking a record any more "useful" than a machine breaking it? | | |
| ▲ | Paratoner 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | Once you lay down the coolaid for a second you'd realize that the whole point of the human experience has little to do with its "usefulness". But you'd have to redo your civic education and maybe socialize first for that to finally hit. | | |
| ▲ | skeledrew 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | Ah, someone who doesn't have a valid argument but feels compelled to argue anyway, and so resorts to personal attacks. I know, it sucks to be in such a position. But you'll feel better once you accept reality. Buck up. | | |
| ▲ | Paratoner 26 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Ah, someone who doesn't have a valid argument but feels compelled to restort anyway, and so resorts to vague-posting about some higher-level point they supposedly hold. Drink up. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | interstice 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Given its form factor there is already a ton of active research into developments that would be just about plug and play. Hands with coordination for example. | | |
| ▲ | qayxc 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | True. Physical capabilities can be added with ease. The actual problem isn't the actuators anymore, though. Very useful for a remote controlled puppet ala "Surrogates" (the film), still not quite there yet when it comes to performing even simple tasks autonomously. Emptying a washing machine located in the cellar/basement, taking the clothes to a room on the ground floor, folding and sorting them before putting them in the closet still is quite the challenge. Wirelessly hooking such robot up to a data centre running heavy machine learning models isn't a proper solution either, because in contrast to digital agents, latency matters quite a bit in physical interactions. |
|
| |
| ▲ | almost_usual 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | My bar is the Kilian Jornet test. Once a humanoid robot can do everything he’s done within the same time constraints it’s officially over. Until then human is the best at navigating and moving across various terrain. | |
| ▲ | ncr100 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Not in feeling emotions. | |
| ▲ | scotty79 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I'm ready since I was born. I'm including the times when people were better than machines at anything into Middle Ages. I hope I'll live long enough so I can see civilization finally exit them. | |
| ▲ | oulipo 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | You won't be outperformed in humanity. And that's precisely the point. People will start rejecting AI and robots en masse, because they'll get disgusted by it, the same way you are disgusted when eating a "powder shake" kind of meal compared to a whole, earthy, flavorful, home-made meal | | |
| ▲ | wincy 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Workers hated the factories of the Industrial Revolution but the masses also wanted those sweet sweet high quality textiles that were tighter knit and lasted longer than anything handspun. The same will happen for AI. Also, further counterpoint, if we reject industrial produced food, who spent $139 billion at McDonald’s in 2025? | |
| ▲ | skeledrew 15 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > humanity What does that even mean? BTW I consumed Soylent regularly for several years while living in the US and was never "disgusted" by it. Would love to get my hands on some now as it's been so long. You should watch your arguments. | | |
| ▲ | therealcamino 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | What does "watch your arguments" even mean? It's just "Dont say anything I disagree with" with a threatening tone. | | |
| ▲ | defrost 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Why bother asking a question you already have your preferred straw man answer to? For many humans "watch your arguments" carries the same tone as "pay attention to those boxes you're standing on". A reasonable assumption here would be the GP questioning the assumed universal truth of: the same way [ all people ] are disgusted when eating a "powder shake" kind of meal compared to a whole, earthy, flavorful, home-made meal
|
|
| |
| ▲ | bluefirebrand 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | If people were rejecting them en masse now we might have a chance to reverse this As it stands I am not hopeful. I believe the frog will be well and truly boiled long before we reach the rejection en masse stage and it will be too late to change course |
| |
| ▲ | tomcam 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | That's what she said |
|
|
| ▲ | vivekd 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I keep reading about these things in the news, and they are nice marketing stance. But I still wonder how far we are away from humanoid robots being commonplace in every day life. I don't share the fear some seem to have towards robots, just because a world filled with robots was something I dreamed of as kid. But I still wonder about the cost and feasibility of robot police officers, or cashiers etc. |
| |
| ▲ | conartist6 16 hours ago | parent [-] | | I'd be fine with it if they were alive. If not, no. | | |
| ▲ | andai 15 hours ago | parent [-] | | Those Chinese robot demos show more signs of life than zoomer service workers | | |
| ▲ | esseph 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | Anybody that has to work with the public and is toward the bottom of the economic totem pole has a bit of the shit end of the stick tbf. Has to be an absolutely crushing feeling, especially if they don't see a way to college or if they've lost faith in the institution or degree. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | AngryData 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| How many times/long can it do that before being recharged? Can it do other walking and mobility tasks? The headline by itself doesn't really mean much, anyone can build a purpose-built robot to beat specific human limitations. The question is can it have that kind of performance without completely foregoing most other tasks and abilities. |
| |
| ▲ | skeledrew 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > How many times/long can it do that before being recharged? Can it do other walking and mobility tasks? You should ask those questions in the same spirit re a 1 vs a 5 vs a 20 year old. May lead to some insight on development-level-based capability. | |
| ▲ | shevy-java 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I agree there, but IMO these are problems that can be fairly easily solved. My bigger problem is that this is labelled as "humanoid robot". IMO that is more like some machine gadget that looks very remotely like some non-descript model of a humanoid, but not anything at all like a humanoid robot. I am a bit spoiled by Blade Runner here - these robots right now come nowhere close to anything like that right now, even if they run faster than Usain Bolt (but they run differently, so they are cheating; look at the angles, the tiny feet, the cheating in the hip area, the barely existing head - so many things are CHEATING here. I can not call this humanoid robot). | | |
| ▲ | hakfoo 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | There's a good chance that most humanoid robots are not going to look particularly hunan. You might have different proportions due to different weight distribution or use cases (maybe the legs are made less flexible if the workspace has fewer obstables, for example. Maybe "bipedal" is a better descriptor, since wheels are a proven way to go faster than Usain Bolt, but walking-style strides are new. |
| |
| ▲ | mmooss 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > anyone can build a purpose-built robot to beat specific human limitations Anyone could build a robot that could run on two legs at that speed for 100m? I think someone would have done it before. Even the other robots in the race were slower. | | |
| ▲ | AngryData 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | Why would they when we can already far exceed humans with other methods of locomotion? I don't see high jumping huminoid robots either despite it being even easier to implement. | | |
| ▲ | esseph 5 hours ago | parent [-] | | Now climb a mountain with your wheeled robot. (You can't.) Your bipedal one might be able to walk or run or jump up there though. > I don't see high jumping They did high jump in this very same contest. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | SoftTalker 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| A machine is stronger and faster than a human? Shocking. Next we'll learn that cranes can lift heavy loads faster than a human with ropes and pulleys. |
| |
| ▲ | 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | paulpauper 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | a bullet is faster than any car. the point is, it's a humanoid type robot, not just a faster vehicle. | | |
| ▲ | qayxc 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I don't see the difference. Is a humanoid robot not a machine? What surprises is that it took so long to achieve this. It took Honda 20 years to get to ASIMO in 2000. I'm not surprised by the fact that 26(!) years later, a humanoid robot finally exceeds human capabilities in basic tasks like running. Such robot would easily smash the current marathon record as well and the only thing I'd be impressed by, would be the battery capacity tbh. | | |
| ▲ | Cookingboy 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | But not all machines are the same? If you were ever trapped on the top floor of a burning building, should we just send a car up there? Nobody is surprised by advancement like this, but there is still a lot of engineering that went into it, not talking about how it’s now almost consumer grade tech that you can buy. | | |
| ▲ | qayxc 15 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > If you were ever trapped on the top floor of a burning building, should we just send a car up there? Riddle me this then: what role does a robot that has been built to run real fast play in that scenario? Sure, a good deal of engineering went into this, but the hard part - solving bipedal locomotion - had been done long before that. Apart from showing off it's not really advancing the field and so there's not too much left to be impressed by (honestly, the battery and actuator efficiency that allowed the thing to do a half marathon was MUCH more impressive, at least to me). It seems to me to be more analogous to car tuning. | | |
| ▲ | throw1234567891 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | > what role does a robot that has been built to run real fast play in that scenario? It will run real fast up the stairs, I guess? Is it a good enough riddle? | | |
| ▲ | qayxc 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | The thing has no real arms, hands or carry capacity, so what would be the point? Running up the stairs is the easy part after all. The difficult part in such scenario is lack of orientation due to smoke, obstacles like locked doors or fallen debris, unstable walls and ceilings, locating people and getting them out safely. All of those things require a good amount of autonomy, on-the-spot physical problem solving and judgement. To this effect, the recent DARPA Triage Challenge, which has its final taking place in November this year, seems like a much more thorough and practical demonstration of current capabilities. Something to look forward to if you're interested in the current state-of-the-art w.r.t. real-world applications of robotics. |
|
| |
| ▲ | throw1234567891 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | If I'm trapped in a burning building and am at the top floor, send a helicopter, dude. The robot will be fine on the way back (maybe) bu I won't! |
| |
| ▲ | paulpauper 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | What people find impressive or interesting is subjective, I guess. | | |
| ▲ | qayxc 15 hours ago | parent [-] | | Absolutely. I was impressed by ASIMO and Atlas. Running fast, though, doesn't seem all that impressive by comparison, but yeah YMMV. | | |
| ▲ | hakfoo 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | It's a very pretty benchmark. Everyone has the same basic objective and measurement norm, so we can see how performance improves year over year, and how different manufacturers handle a specific known goal, even if it's not super-representative of real world use cases. Billion-dollar supercomputers don't spend most of their time running LINPACK, and some probably perform better on specific tasks, but it doesn't make the Top 500 list any less of a thing. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | shevy-java 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Why would you call it "humanoid"? Can you qualify this? Because I came to the conclusion that this is NOT a humanoid robot. Having one rectangle and four long spear-like things, does not make something "humanoid". So which criteria do you use? | | |
| ▲ | phoghed 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Per the article > Lightning the humanoid robot clocks 9.32sec in Beijing Bipedal, hips, knees, feet. Looks humanoid to me. If cloudflare puts this in a grid of images and asks me to pick the humanoids, I’m clicking it | | | |
| ▲ | petcat 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I think of "humanoid" as a machine capable of operating in the same complex physical environment as humans do. For instance, it is generally more comfortable for a healthy adult human to use a steep staircase than a steep ramp. So a "humanoid" robot would be capable of using the same staircase instead of requiring a ramp to be purpose-built just for it. | |
| ▲ | 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | nom 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | it is of humanoid shape |
|
| |
| ▲ | DrewADesign 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | >> a humanoid robot that can competently run > A machine is stronger and faster than a human? Shocking. Next we'll learn that cranes can lift heavy loads faster than a human with ropes and pullys. It’s funny how absurdly dismissive and condescending tech people can be about difficult problems in other people’s fields that they know absolutely nothing about. Numerous developers, informed by maybe a YouTube video, Reddit thread, or equally misguided explainer post on another developer’s blog, have tried to ‘correct’ me about topics in a field in which I hold a degree and have plenty of professional experience. Other tech people might be impressed because they have matching blind spots in their mental models of the world, but people who actually understand, rather than baselessly assuming they understand, see someone being smug about their own ignorance. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/engineer%27s_disease | | |
| ▲ | SoftTalker 12 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Stop being so proud of your degree. People see the world the way they want to, and your lectures aren't going to change that. | | |
| ▲ | DrewADesign 12 hours ago | parent [-] | | Sorry, your uninformed opinion doesn’t match expertise. Correctness isn’t democratic. Glib bullshit is glib bullshit no matter how vested you are in the ego that it’s stroking. |
| |
| ▲ | bluefirebrand 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > It’s funny how absurdly dismissive and condescending tech people can be about difficult problems in other people’s fields that they know absolutely nothing about "Machines can do stuff humans cannot do" isn't exactly groundbreaking in 2026. The only interesting part of this story is that this particular machine form factor looks pretty much like a human It's still not exactly shocking news that it can outrun a human. Of course it can. We're well past John Henry vs the Machine at this point in history | | |
| ▲ | DrewADesign 12 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Not that it looks like a human — that it basically is structured like a human skeletal system. It’s an incredible technical accomplishment. | |
| ▲ | scotty79 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > The only interesting part of this story is that this particular machine form factor looks pretty much like a human That's the whole goddamn point of this. Fast stable autonomous bipedal locomotion was out of reach of human technology for decades. Since this year it isn't. This was impossible year ago, despite all of the achievements of humanity, cumulative, till the year 2025, included. Now it isn't. | | |
| ▲ | bluefirebrand 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | I think tech like this is accelerating us into extinction, So forgive me if I don't exactly celebrate "That's the whole point" that we don't need humans anymore? Great. I'm a human. You want me to celebrate? No thanks | | |
| ▲ | simonra 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | "Being needed" is a poor choice of source of existential happiness and contentment though. Sure, it's an easy and accessible one for the masses with some mental gymnastics around how you view your income generating activities (or by having kids). But it's still dependent on others, as you need them being at hand to impact. See all the needless depression arising from kids moving out, or when people retire and complain about not being needed instead of finding new activities to explore or grow in. As for the fear of human labour not being needed at scale due to me as most others needing an income, I'm optimistic there for two reasons. First, large unfed masses tend to start revolutions, something both governments and the not-working are interested in avoiding. Second, large amounts of young idle people has tended to result in stupid destructive behaviour at scale. So I'm confident there will be created opportunities for paid work for mostly everyone, and the conditions won't be too poor as there would be no profit motive to push people too far. Rather, the people having both the resources, time, and energy to consume, would still be what props up the system (until we can agree on trying something better now that we have excellent tools for guaranteeing transparency and optimising allocation at scale in real time). | |
| ▲ | scotty79 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It's fine to not be happy about it, but denying what's happening is a completely different thing. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | mbeavitt a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It's crazy how these records are just quietly being broken by humanoid robots. What's next? What a time to be alive. |
| |
| ▲ | gruturo 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > What's next? Killer robots which can't be outrun and which can give chase through urban landscapes > What a time to be alive Indeed. | | |
| ▲ | ncr100 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | What's next: Waiting patiently, as the perfect sniper. First hiking 10 miles into enemy territory. Then laying down in low-power mode, for 120 days. Finally waiting for "important enemy person" to pass by, and then using a weapon with super-human sensory skills + weaponry. Note - Does not need to be humanoid. We need to start Waging Peace, as our ability to kill each other is outstripping our willingness to live peacefully together. |
| |
| ▲ | qsera 20 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | >What a time to be alive. Totally. In a little while, you might even be able to marry a robot and even raise robot kids. What a time to be alive indeed! I highly doubt that that it will happen. But just mocking the celebration of paving a path towards the death of all things that makes being a human worth all the pain.. | | |
| ▲ | ozyschmozy 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > all things that makes being a human worth all the pain Running fast or jumping high are what makes being a human worth all the pain? | |
| ▲ | skeledrew 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > the death of all things that makes being a human worth all the pain I'd say that's the problem. There are people who think humans are uniquely special/purposed, and AI is systematically destroying that notion. They need to wake up, or they may find themselves jumping off a bridge or something. | | |
| ▲ | qsera 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | Humans are special because they can feel. You know what it means to "feel", right? |
| |
| ▲ | 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | blaufuchs 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yknow, for a tech news aggregation website, some of you really hate technology | | |
| ▲ | p_j_w 17 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Do you think people on hackernews should embrace every use of technology? | |
| ▲ | Retric 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Technology isn’t a single unified thing. People can like GPS while disliking nuclear weapons without any contradiction. I dislike the vast waste of resources happening during the current AI bubble, and don’t really care about generative AI. |
|
| |
| ▲ | grim_io 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Horses are faster than humans. I don't see them suddenly taking over based on that fact alone. | | |
| ▲ | hobofan 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You can't "program" a horse to do construction or assembly line jobs, can you? | | |
| ▲ | qayxc 16 hours ago | parent [-] | | My contacts at various factories and my own eyes after touring said factories tell me that the assembly lines have been mostly run by programmed (no quotes required, just SPS) robots for the past 50 years or so.
Welcome back to the 1970s I guess? The ones I see deployed in construction do stuff like drilling holes in hard to reach places, or laying bricks. None of them look like people, though. Much like the typical household dishwasher hasn't been named Alice or Doris for the past 50+ years, but rather Bosch or Samsung and doesn't use actual hands. But yeah, humanoid robots do look cool and many movies and books told us to be fearful of them. |
| |
| ▲ | 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
|
| ▲ | unprovable a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Usain Volt |
| |
|
| ▲ | throw101010 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| All the snarky comments about cars or other vehicles doing it faster seem to miss the point that none of these attempt to mimic/improve on the running movements of humans... but I guess you do you, this is an impressive robotics feat in my oponion. |
| |
| ▲ | qayxc 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It would've been impressive 15 years ago. People seem to forget that first humanoid robot capable of competently walking was showcased by Honda 26 years ago.
over 20 years ago, the updated version was capable of running and climbing stairs. So a purpose-built (look at the thing - running is all it can actually do) two legged fast running robot doesn't seem all that impressive today. Cool? Sure! Useful? Not so much. Impressive? Whatever... it's just showing off at this point, much like Boston Dynamic's Atlas series that went nowhere (in contrast to this machine: this one did half marathon distance:) | |
| ▲ | throw1234567891 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | We've been seeing humanoid robots walking, jumping, climbing stairs for at least a decade. |
|
|
| ▲ | timedude 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Nice, but can it outrun Tom Cruise? |
|
| ▲ | t_mehmet 14 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Did this thing travel thru a time portal and ask for a boots, clothes sunglasses and motorcycle too? this stuff seems to be evolving very quickly now. wasnt that long ago these things were legs only with cables and bunch of humans holding it. |
|
| ▲ | 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | throw1234567891 14 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It's cheating. Make it start from the crouch start. |
|
| ▲ | zeristor a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Robo Olympics? Humans on enhancements vs robots? |
|
| ▲ | feverzsj 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| They ran so fast that most of them crashed into pieces in the end. |
|
| ▲ | shevy-java 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Well - in a way this is nice, just for documented record, even though a bit useless too. However had, I watched it, and I have some problems here. First: these robots have barely any head. I think for a humanoid robot, you need
to have a proper head with some weight in relation to the rest, otherwise it is
just SIMULATING being humanoid. Then the feet; this is also a problem. Specifically
the feet are not like human feet at all, they are more like stubs or elongated stubs with push-back being made-super easy. Usain Bolt does not have such short jokes of feet, so this comparison is unfair. Same with the hip area - I am sorry, but the hip structure of these robots is ABSOLUTELY not at all like a human. I am not even calling these humanoids. Don't get me wrong, it is good that science and technology progresses and such robots may do things that robots solely with a wheel alone, may be unable to do, such as running, climbing, you name it. But I simply can not call them "humanoid". They are, IMO, simply not humanoid and not even humanoid-like. For "proper" science fiction, have a look at the first Blade Runner movie, but also the first terminator. Initially Cameron thought Arnold was unfit because he was massive and the infiltrating cyborg should melt into the environment easily (which was better in Terminator 2, T1000 was kind of more "logical", but I hated the background storyline in Terminator 2, it made no sense to me, no clue why people preferred that over the original terminator movie). I am aware that these running robots don't aim to be a look-alike replacement, but they simply also should not be called humanoid robots right now. They simply are not humanoid. Thus one should not call them that way. |
|
| ▲ | joduplessis 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This is super exciting for fast message delivery. I'm so tired of my messages taking 2 weeks to deliver! 3000km shouldn't take that long! Personally I'm really looking forward to a world where my message can take maybe even a week to deliver to someone 2000km - 3000km away. What a time to be alive. |
| |
|
| ▲ | graemep 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Its a nice demo of advances, but its not hugely significant in the way some comments here make it out to be. We have had machines faster than humans for a long time. We have had animals faster than humans for longer than there have been humans. |
| |
| ▲ | petcat 17 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > We have had machines faster than humans for a long time Yes it is true that we have had machines on rubber wheels that can move very fast on open roadways. But these new machines are also capable of walking up and down stairs, navigating obstacles, using doorways, and generally operating in the same complex spaces that humans do. Now apparently they can run really fast too. | |
| ▲ | prmph 16 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Yes, but these robots can presumably go where wheels can't |
|
|
| ▲ | quickthrowman 14 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I’m much more interested in seeing a robot with excellent fine motor control. A robot folding a piece of tissue paper without ripping it would be more impressive to me than this robot or the backflip robot. |
|
| ▲ | bethekidyouwant 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Both robots were carried away on stretcher afterwards… |
|
| ▲ | m3kw9 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I'm not impressed if you are gonna compare a strength and pretty 1D dex of a machine to a human. |
|
| ▲ | EA-3167 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Robot Wars with government funding and a coat of paint? Ok then. |
|
| ▲ | mmooss 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| If this Silicon Valley forum is full of people denying the achievement, and the US goverment is banning the technology and competition, I expect the engineers and scientists in China will pull much further ahead. The US is behaving like an industry incumbent, like Blackberry when the iPhone came out. That the US could fall behind on technology seems to have not crossed many minds. It will be very hard to overcome that first mover advantage. |
| |
| ▲ | throw1234567891 14 hours ago | parent [-] | | > If this Silicon Valley forum
There are people from all over the planet hre. More like "If this forum created by a guy from Silicon Valley..." | | |
| ▲ | mmooss 13 hours ago | parent [-] | | True, but I think it's still centered very much on SV. For example, those Chinese engineers aren't here. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | bena 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It’s the distance rather than the speed that is impressive. Or, to be more accurate, the distance at that speed. Because, of course the machine which does not tire and is deliberately designed to be durable and exceed natural human tolerances are better than humans. Cranes can lift far more than the strongest man. But I understand that historically, bipedal machines have had balancing issues. The number of slight adjustments needed are significant. And doing it while at that speed and also not tumbling over is an achievement. |
|
| ▲ | drnick1 16 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| In other news, my Corolla also travels faster than Usain Bolt. |
|
| ▲ | seydor 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| One day that robot will invent the wheel |
|
| ▲ | utopcell 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I don't want to alarm people but I hear they now have automobiles that can outrun humans. |