Skip to content
  • Hjem
  • Seneste
  • Etiketter
  • Populære
  • Verden
  • Bruger
  • Grupper
Temaer
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Kollaps
FARVEL BIG TECH
  1. Forside
  2. Ikke-kategoriseret
  3. "How will an LLM change the bedpans in the nursing home?""Oh.

"How will an LLM change the bedpans in the nursing home?""Oh.

Planlagt Fastgjort Låst Flyttet Ikke-kategoriseret
91 Indlæg 43 Posters 266 Visninger
  • Ældste til nyeste
  • Nyeste til ældste
  • Most Votes
Svar
  • Svar som emne
Login for at svare
Denne tråd er blevet slettet. Kun brugere med emne behandlings privilegier kan se den.
  • nonnihil@hachyderm.ioN nonnihil@hachyderm.io

    @futurebird @mxchara
    So much this. The only problem in robotics is everything, because each problem in robotics is every other problem in robotics in a trenchcoat.

    robotistry@fediscience.orgR This user is from outside of this forum
    robotistry@fediscience.orgR This user is from outside of this forum
    robotistry@fediscience.org
    wrote sidst redigeret af
    #11

    @nonnihil @futurebird @mxchara This so precisely correct. Can I steal it for a presentation?

    clew@ecoevo.socialC nonnihil@hachyderm.ioN 2 Replies Last reply
    0
    • p__x@mastodon.socialP p__x@mastodon.social

      @futurebird nothing's more exciting than the thought of getting trapped under a 200-pound biped humanoid robot made of hard plastics and metal that tripped while exchanging one's soiled bed sheets.

      robotistry@fediscience.orgR This user is from outside of this forum
      robotistry@fediscience.orgR This user is from outside of this forum
      robotistry@fediscience.org
      wrote sidst redigeret af
      #12

      @P__X @futurebird Yet another reason why I'm skeptical about humanoid use cases.

      p__x@mastodon.socialP 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • robotistry@fediscience.orgR robotistry@fediscience.org

        @nonnihil @futurebird @mxchara This so precisely correct. Can I steal it for a presentation?

        clew@ecoevo.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
        clew@ecoevo.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
        clew@ecoevo.social
        wrote sidst redigeret af
        #13

        I would like examples, as a complete non roboticist

        @Robotistry @nonnihil @futurebird @mxchara

        nonnihil@hachyderm.ioN 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

          "How will an LLM change the bedpans in the nursing home?"
          "Oh. Robots. Obviously."
          "... So, you'd say the greatest obstacle to robot home assistance is... what? Software?"
          "Ah. I see why you are skeptical. But you have not considered that the LLM will also design better robots."
          "Really? That sounds amazing. Can we do it right now?"
          "Two years."
          "Oh."
          "..."
          "..."
          "What do you mean. 'oh'?"
          "Nothing. I'm... I'm so excited. For the robots. Like you said."
          "You're mocking me."
          "No. I would never."

          guillotine_jones@beige.partyG This user is from outside of this forum
          guillotine_jones@beige.partyG This user is from outside of this forum
          guillotine_jones@beige.party
          wrote sidst redigeret af
          #14

          @futurebird
          Funny how ALL the gen Ai LLM benefits are in the (currently) nonexistent future, a time when all of us will be dead, and none of us will be able to either benefit from it or to do anything about it.
          We have the misfortune of living in a time when money and marketing-speak talk so loudly that every rational voice is drowned out by the sound of greed.

          fragarach@social.vivaldi.netF 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • clew@ecoevo.socialC clew@ecoevo.social

            I would like examples, as a complete non roboticist

            @Robotistry @nonnihil @futurebird @mxchara

            nonnihil@hachyderm.ioN This user is from outside of this forum
            nonnihil@hachyderm.ioN This user is from outside of this forum
            nonnihil@hachyderm.io
            wrote sidst redigeret af
            #15

            @clew @Robotistry @futurebird @mxchara
            Say I want to climb a stair. Now I need a leg (mech e), which needs a balancing controller (classical control), which means estimating payload inertias (learned control), and I need a big battery (materials science) or a passive dynamic walker design (mech e again) and regenerative motor braking (ee).
            Say i dig down on regenerative braking. Now I need a high-rate controller (sw. eng), low-backlash geartrain (mech e), high-rate battery charging (f'ing solid state physics) and a plan for overcharge (safety enge, ee). That plan for overcharge has to include emergency stop (classical control) of a possibly dynamically unsafe system (learned control? probably?) while on uneven terrain (mech e) which is.... back to where we started trying to climb a stair.
            This is an example of a _mostly solved_ problem. The real world of unsolved problems is much, much worse. Changing any constant by a millimeter blows up all your assumptions everywhere in the stack in a way that no single engineer can have in their head at once.

            Plantigrade humanoids arguably are the worst case of this problem, but autonomous cars have a few notable strange fractal doom loops where nobody can understand it all at once.

            clew@ecoevo.socialC 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

              "How will an LLM change the bedpans in the nursing home?"
              "Oh. Robots. Obviously."
              "... So, you'd say the greatest obstacle to robot home assistance is... what? Software?"
              "Ah. I see why you are skeptical. But you have not considered that the LLM will also design better robots."
              "Really? That sounds amazing. Can we do it right now?"
              "Two years."
              "Oh."
              "..."
              "..."
              "What do you mean. 'oh'?"
              "Nothing. I'm... I'm so excited. For the robots. Like you said."
              "You're mocking me."
              "No. I would never."

              jestbill@mastodon.worldJ This user is from outside of this forum
              jestbill@mastodon.worldJ This user is from outside of this forum
              jestbill@mastodon.world
              wrote sidst redigeret af
              #16

              @futurebird Somehow you have to separate the car enthusiasts from the people who yell "Get a horse", from the grifters and con men.
              We're pretty sure that LLMs are keen but can't do a lot without some actual AI in control.

              CAD is old hat; hows about CAD+?

              Robots? When they show off robots they still point to great new things like ankles(!). The hardware isn't ready yet.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • robotistry@fediscience.orgR robotistry@fediscience.org

                @nonnihil @futurebird @mxchara This so precisely correct. Can I steal it for a presentation?

                nonnihil@hachyderm.ioN This user is from outside of this forum
                nonnihil@hachyderm.ioN This user is from outside of this forum
                nonnihil@hachyderm.io
                wrote sidst redigeret af
                #17

                @Robotistry @futurebird @mxchara
                Go right ahead 🙂

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • nonnihil@hachyderm.ioN nonnihil@hachyderm.io

                  @clew @Robotistry @futurebird @mxchara
                  Say I want to climb a stair. Now I need a leg (mech e), which needs a balancing controller (classical control), which means estimating payload inertias (learned control), and I need a big battery (materials science) or a passive dynamic walker design (mech e again) and regenerative motor braking (ee).
                  Say i dig down on regenerative braking. Now I need a high-rate controller (sw. eng), low-backlash geartrain (mech e), high-rate battery charging (f'ing solid state physics) and a plan for overcharge (safety enge, ee). That plan for overcharge has to include emergency stop (classical control) of a possibly dynamically unsafe system (learned control? probably?) while on uneven terrain (mech e) which is.... back to where we started trying to climb a stair.
                  This is an example of a _mostly solved_ problem. The real world of unsolved problems is much, much worse. Changing any constant by a millimeter blows up all your assumptions everywhere in the stack in a way that no single engineer can have in their head at once.

                  Plantigrade humanoids arguably are the worst case of this problem, but autonomous cars have a few notable strange fractal doom loops where nobody can understand it all at once.

                  clew@ecoevo.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                  clew@ecoevo.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                  clew@ecoevo.social
                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                  #18

                  Hard because changing one of those parts changes what all the other parts need? Because a little change one place might lead to a huge change elsewhere, even a change of direction?

                  (Zero robotics, but I have some of the math!)

                  @nonnihil @Robotistry @futurebird @mxchara

                  nonnihil@hachyderm.ioN 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                    "How will an LLM change the bedpans in the nursing home?"
                    "Oh. Robots. Obviously."
                    "... So, you'd say the greatest obstacle to robot home assistance is... what? Software?"
                    "Ah. I see why you are skeptical. But you have not considered that the LLM will also design better robots."
                    "Really? That sounds amazing. Can we do it right now?"
                    "Two years."
                    "Oh."
                    "..."
                    "..."
                    "What do you mean. 'oh'?"
                    "Nothing. I'm... I'm so excited. For the robots. Like you said."
                    "You're mocking me."
                    "No. I would never."

                    nagaram@gts.thinkstoomuch.netN This user is from outside of this forum
                    nagaram@gts.thinkstoomuch.netN This user is from outside of this forum
                    nagaram@gts.thinkstoomuch.net
                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                    #19

                    @futurebird

                    This is what I've been bullying my AI hopeful colleagues for for years.

                    Robotics hasn't gotten better since the 1990s because it turns out human motion is incredibly precise, adaptable, and REALLY COMPLICATED

                    We physically can't make an arm shaped thing that works like an arm. We can make an arm shaped thing that can do certain arm like tasks, maybe pick up an ergonomic object, press a few buttons, or I guess flip over packages for 4 hours per that one new "AI" stream. But that same arm can't do surgery, it can't drive operate heavy machinery, hell, it couldn't reach behind a couch to plug in a vacuum with near the ease we have.

                    I will admit, the compute is probably there. We can probably simulate the motion of a person enough that an AI scale compute system could do the math to plug in a vacuum. But motors aren't getting smaller. Not without becoming uselessly weak. We've hit the physics barrier of electromagnetism.

                    Hell, look at any video of an incredibly sophisticated hand and just conceptualize how many hand positions it can make. Then try to make one you know it can't. Cross your fingers. Touch your thumb to each finger tip, see how fast you can do it. You are so much more sophisticated than a robot.

                    And obviously, we could just, redesign the whole world to accommodate bots with just a slew of specialized tools to be a portion of human ability, but that's quite expensive since we've already built the world to our liking.

                    So unless we want to rebuild the world with the logic of an Amazon Warehouse, the bots aren't going to take over for a while.

                    futurebird@sauropods.winF lunadragofelis@void.lgbtL lispi314@udongein.xyzL 3 Replies Last reply
                    0
                    • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                      "How will an LLM change the bedpans in the nursing home?"
                      "Oh. Robots. Obviously."
                      "... So, you'd say the greatest obstacle to robot home assistance is... what? Software?"
                      "Ah. I see why you are skeptical. But you have not considered that the LLM will also design better robots."
                      "Really? That sounds amazing. Can we do it right now?"
                      "Two years."
                      "Oh."
                      "..."
                      "..."
                      "What do you mean. 'oh'?"
                      "Nothing. I'm... I'm so excited. For the robots. Like you said."
                      "You're mocking me."
                      "No. I would never."

                      cstamp@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                      cstamp@mastodon.socialC This user is from outside of this forum
                      cstamp@mastodon.social
                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                      #20

                      @futurebird And this misses the part about which the robot collects data about your health, personal habits, contacts and passes them along to someone who sells them to 3rd parties. Maybe the 3rd parties actually are linked to the robot.

                      Rosie would never have done that.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                        @mxchara

                        Nobody wants a robot that's durable, versatile, powerful and sensitive and not too expensive (and self-repairing, obviously) more than me.

                        It would be so amazing if the problem were software and not software, power, design, everything.

                        fragarach@social.vivaldi.netF This user is from outside of this forum
                        fragarach@social.vivaldi.netF This user is from outside of this forum
                        fragarach@social.vivaldi.net
                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                        #21

                        @futurebird @mxchara

                        It's also design philosophy, so they'll likely design robots that need to be replaced every couple of years with a new, upgraded model. Just like your mobile phone, washing machine and fridge.
                        Douglas Adams, sadly missed, wrote about an SEP(*) field that allows aliens to walk unnoticed among us.
                        That same field is in evidence in the thinking of every techbro, most manufacturers and a large number of politicians, most notably when it comes to climate change, depletion of resources, and the poisoning of our planet with the byproducts of manufacturing and disposal.
                        If anyone is likely to produce a viable domestic robot, my money's on Ukraine.

                        * Somebody Else's Problem

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • guillotine_jones@beige.partyG guillotine_jones@beige.party

                          @futurebird
                          Funny how ALL the gen Ai LLM benefits are in the (currently) nonexistent future, a time when all of us will be dead, and none of us will be able to either benefit from it or to do anything about it.
                          We have the misfortune of living in a time when money and marketing-speak talk so loudly that every rational voice is drowned out by the sound of greed.

                          fragarach@social.vivaldi.netF This user is from outside of this forum
                          fragarach@social.vivaldi.netF This user is from outside of this forum
                          fragarach@social.vivaldi.net
                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                          #22

                          @Guillotine_Jones @futurebird

                          I suspect that future historians (if there are any) may well decide that the first Luddites were right all along, and that various First Nations and the Amish had the right idea as to how humankind should live in this world of ours.

                          mlbellar@universeodon.comM 1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • clew@ecoevo.socialC clew@ecoevo.social

                            Hard because changing one of those parts changes what all the other parts need? Because a little change one place might lead to a huge change elsewhere, even a change of direction?

                            (Zero robotics, but I have some of the math!)

                            @nonnihil @Robotistry @futurebird @mxchara

                            nonnihil@hachyderm.ioN This user is from outside of this forum
                            nonnihil@hachyderm.ioN This user is from outside of this forum
                            nonnihil@hachyderm.io
                            wrote sidst redigeret af
                            #23

                            @clew @Robotistry @futurebird @mxchara
                            (To be clear, I love robotics, it is the best job, even better than crazy radio shit)

                            The problem is that any fix requires fixing multiple levels at once, and those levels are in different, often warring disciplines.

                            For instance, if you find a vendor underspecced a motor brake (they always do) now you need to reduce the length of limbs, the available torques in software, the available currents in power management, oh right that changes which constraints bind the constraint solver so I hope the controller software has hopped on to renormalizing Jacobians an' shit, also wake up the contract lawyer, negotiate building access for the vendor's technicians, and probably 3D-print some little stop widgets as well to clip onto the motor to backstop any broken brake springs, but maybe those can wait until overnight. Also the new constants for the balance controller to avoid stressing that motor cause the robot to make lots of quick stomping steps, annoying the tenants below your lab because the vibration aerated their anaerobes or something, so your landlord is also on the phone now.

                            Realistically no individual person in this job _can_ be a specialist in only one area; everyone needs to know enough of everything to at least talk to each other. That sort of hyper-generalist workplace is an absolute trip to work in. And it isn't going to get solved by "AI" in short-to-medium time, although several parts of it will become moderately simpler or cheaper.

                            levzadov@kolektiva.socialL robotistry@fediscience.orgR clew@ecoevo.socialC 4 Replies Last reply
                            0
                            • robotistry@fediscience.orgR robotistry@fediscience.org

                              @P__X @futurebird Yet another reason why I'm skeptical about humanoid use cases.

                              p__x@mastodon.socialP This user is from outside of this forum
                              p__x@mastodon.socialP This user is from outside of this forum
                              p__x@mastodon.social
                              wrote sidst redigeret af
                              #24

                              @Robotistry @futurebird ditto.

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • nonnihil@hachyderm.ioN nonnihil@hachyderm.io

                                @futurebird @mxchara
                                So much this. The only problem in robotics is everything, because each problem in robotics is every other problem in robotics in a trenchcoat.

                                futurebird@sauropods.winF This user is from outside of this forum
                                futurebird@sauropods.winF This user is from outside of this forum
                                futurebird@sauropods.win
                                wrote sidst redigeret af
                                #25

                                @nonnihil @mxchara

                                "Robotics is hard."

                                "There are no royal roads to robots."

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • nagaram@gts.thinkstoomuch.netN nagaram@gts.thinkstoomuch.net

                                  @futurebird

                                  This is what I've been bullying my AI hopeful colleagues for for years.

                                  Robotics hasn't gotten better since the 1990s because it turns out human motion is incredibly precise, adaptable, and REALLY COMPLICATED

                                  We physically can't make an arm shaped thing that works like an arm. We can make an arm shaped thing that can do certain arm like tasks, maybe pick up an ergonomic object, press a few buttons, or I guess flip over packages for 4 hours per that one new "AI" stream. But that same arm can't do surgery, it can't drive operate heavy machinery, hell, it couldn't reach behind a couch to plug in a vacuum with near the ease we have.

                                  I will admit, the compute is probably there. We can probably simulate the motion of a person enough that an AI scale compute system could do the math to plug in a vacuum. But motors aren't getting smaller. Not without becoming uselessly weak. We've hit the physics barrier of electromagnetism.

                                  Hell, look at any video of an incredibly sophisticated hand and just conceptualize how many hand positions it can make. Then try to make one you know it can't. Cross your fingers. Touch your thumb to each finger tip, see how fast you can do it. You are so much more sophisticated than a robot.

                                  And obviously, we could just, redesign the whole world to accommodate bots with just a slew of specialized tools to be a portion of human ability, but that's quite expensive since we've already built the world to our liking.

                                  So unless we want to rebuild the world with the logic of an Amazon Warehouse, the bots aren't going to take over for a while.

                                  futurebird@sauropods.winF This user is from outside of this forum
                                  futurebird@sauropods.winF This user is from outside of this forum
                                  futurebird@sauropods.win
                                  wrote sidst redigeret af
                                  #26

                                  @nagaram

                                  If these people watched ants more they wouldn't be so blithe about robots.

                                  I watched an ant carry a feather 15 times* longer than her body up a wall into a crack since she was enjoying chewing on the end and didn't want to share with other ants.

                                  It would put every human gymnast to shame. It makes every robot look like a joke.

                                  But that's millions of years of adaption.

                                  I do think we'll make progress, but it will be hard work. Not magic.

                                  *it was more like just 6 times, but still

                                  paul_ipv6@infosec.exchangeP cinebox@masto.hackers.townC masp@wandering.shopM 3 Replies Last reply
                                  0
                                  • futurebird@sauropods.winF This user is from outside of this forum
                                    futurebird@sauropods.winF This user is from outside of this forum
                                    futurebird@sauropods.win
                                    wrote sidst redigeret af
                                    #27

                                    @dingodog19 @mxchara

                                    They said those words with their mouth. And didn't die instantly of shame.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                                      "How will an LLM change the bedpans in the nursing home?"
                                      "Oh. Robots. Obviously."
                                      "... So, you'd say the greatest obstacle to robot home assistance is... what? Software?"
                                      "Ah. I see why you are skeptical. But you have not considered that the LLM will also design better robots."
                                      "Really? That sounds amazing. Can we do it right now?"
                                      "Two years."
                                      "Oh."
                                      "..."
                                      "..."
                                      "What do you mean. 'oh'?"
                                      "Nothing. I'm... I'm so excited. For the robots. Like you said."
                                      "You're mocking me."
                                      "No. I would never."

                                      johnkavs@mastodon.ieJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                      johnkavs@mastodon.ieJ This user is from outside of this forum
                                      johnkavs@mastodon.ie
                                      wrote sidst redigeret af
                                      #28

                                      @futurebird so let's start laying off people right now

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • futurebird@sauropods.winF futurebird@sauropods.win

                                        @nagaram

                                        If these people watched ants more they wouldn't be so blithe about robots.

                                        I watched an ant carry a feather 15 times* longer than her body up a wall into a crack since she was enjoying chewing on the end and didn't want to share with other ants.

                                        It would put every human gymnast to shame. It makes every robot look like a joke.

                                        But that's millions of years of adaption.

                                        I do think we'll make progress, but it will be hard work. Not magic.

                                        *it was more like just 6 times, but still

                                        paul_ipv6@infosec.exchangeP This user is from outside of this forum
                                        paul_ipv6@infosec.exchangeP This user is from outside of this forum
                                        paul_ipv6@infosec.exchange
                                        wrote sidst redigeret af
                                        #29

                                        @futurebird @nagaram

                                        much of the world probably mistakes "magic" for "someone else did all the hard work".

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • cinebox@masto.hackers.townC This user is from outside of this forum
                                          cinebox@masto.hackers.townC This user is from outside of this forum
                                          cinebox@masto.hackers.town
                                          wrote sidst redigeret af
                                          #30

                                          @dingodog19 @futurebird @mxchara or looked at the cost of even a single stepper motor

                                          futurebird@sauropods.winF 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Svar
                                          • Svar som emne
                                          Login for at svare
                                          • Ældste til nyeste
                                          • Nyeste til ældste
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Log ind

                                          • Har du ikke en konto? Tilmeld

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          Graciously hosted by data.coop
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Hjem
                                          • Seneste
                                          • Etiketter
                                          • Populære
                                          • Verden
                                          • Bruger
                                          • Grupper