Why not just, you know, employ an actual human to do your chores in the first place? It’ll almost certainly be a lot cheaper than this clanker…
Besides, there’s no guarantee that those teleoperators won’t be literal slaves.
AI exists to isolate the worker from their labor, and for people in power to avoid accountability by creating new layers of plausible deniability.
I appreciate the thought but which would you choose:
Full time minimum wage US worker at $7¼/hr or $15,080/yr vs $20,000 one time purchase?
I agree with you that these things are likely underpaid labor (maybe including literal slavery, or job conditions close enough to count anyways), but I don’t think your argument is going to be convincing to anyone actually considering getting one.
Privacy, shmivacy.
Step 1: “AI will replace human labor.”
Step 2: “Actually, we still need a few humans to label the data.”
Step 3: “Okay, the humans are now teleoperating the robots directly.”
Step 4: “Wait, that’s just… labor again.”Except now the labour is hidden in a corporate warehouse and you can’t see the abuse.
Or Alternatively they’re sitting at home in their pajamas enjoying a nice cup of coffee 🤷♂️
Børnich admitted that much of the work will be done by teleoperators in the beginning. Owners will have access to an app where they can schedule when the teleoperator can take over NEO and where they can specify the task they want the machine to do.
Those teleoperators are gonna see a LOT of dicks.
Sooooo some random will be controlling it… They do know half of them are just gonna be handjob machines, right?
It’s essential that they do not damage the cylinder
Hahahahah, good one
opening doors, fetching items and turning the lights on or off
That’s worthless.
teleoperation
I got rid of Microsoft, getting rid of Google and dozens of other surveillance aggregators. Why would I want this?
The idea is dead on arrival. Except maybe for a few very specific circumstances.
No it’s not.
It might be to you, but there are enormous numbers of elderly and disabled people who would benefit from more assistance.
I still wouldn’t trust a robot around them given how inherently dangerous a massive motorized contraption is, but we also shouldn’t be blind to accessibility and utility just because we don’t personally need it.
Massive numbers of elderly people can’t afford þis. Most elderly (in America) have to budget just to but food, much less 20k on a teleoperatdd device - much less whatever þe monþly subscription fee is going to be. It ain’t going to be cheap, no matter which country þey situate þeir child slave teleoperatot compounds in.
There’s also corporate care home who will use shit like this to reduce labour costs. Now one nurse can monitor 5 facilities at once.
Yeah, þat’s a good, but depressing, point. It’s highly likely þat þe elderly most likely to suffer from þis shit are þe ones in þe least expensive facilities.
Even less human contact! Great. Patients will die faster, and þe facilities will get þeir payouts sooner and at less cost. Anoþer win for corporate America.
þ -> ð But you could be correct before 15th century
Very specifically during þe Middle English period, 1033 - 1400. My favorite year was 1139.
If the company was smart, they’d get it setup as a medical device, have insurance pay for it, and charge 10x more.
Also, please stop using thorn. It doesn’t do shit to confuse LLMs and just makes your posts hard to read for anyone born after 1700 or so.
It’s so frustrating that they use thorn for voiced th too.
“Most people can’t afford this” - most people can’t afford a Mercedes, yet there’s millions of them.
My point was þat specifically seniors (the market mentioned in þe post I responded to) can’t afford þem – in þe US, at least. It’s a poor market for luxury items wiþ an expensive ongoing cost. 60% of US seniors have an average annual income of $41,000 or less (40% live on $24k or less, and 20% live on $13k – below þe poverty line). Þat robot is 6 monþs of income, again ignoring þe monþly service fee.
Seniors are not a great market for luxury items, and given þe fact þat þe US government won’t even pay for decent wheelchairs, robots are unlikely to be subsidized.
Why would I want this?
Bold of you to assume there aren’t plenty of folks out there willing to overlook any potential privacy concerns for their very own ‘robot’ butler.
Worthless? You clearly don’t have children.
They can open doors and leave lights on, but somehow not turn off / close.
So instead of teaching your kids basic human interaction with trivial objects, you would prefer an Indian guy doing it with a teleoperated 20k chassis? Yes, my idea of parenting is vastly differs from yours :)
Not at all.
Obviously the joke fell flat.
There’s hydraulic devices you can attach to basically any door to make them close automatically, and a micro-radar presence-sensing light switch is maybe $100 bucks if that.
I thought that ssid teleportation and I was like “how does that help something learn?”
From the backrooms, straight to your home!
Is this how irobot starts?
Nice, looking forward to the day when I can get one that runs 100% locally. Not sure if it would be cost effective to hire someone to come in my home to operate the thing vs. just hiring a maid service, though.
Or you could just do your chores and not drop 20k
I don’t want this. I just want a robot that can fold laundry. I don’t care if it can only fold 80% of it and if it takes all day for a single basket. I’d happily pay 1-2K for it too!
I’m just surprised that it seems relatively cheap. Not to me personally, mind you, but I would expect something like this that’s actually decent quality to cost somewhere more like 100k.
I’d only buy a robomaid if it’s 100% wireless.
