Humanoid Robots for Moon and Mars

[lamontagne]

The bottom line here is that the future may not be humanoid robots per se, but robots designed for the jobs humans need done. In other words, humanoid robots will likely be rare on Mars, and limited to specific jobs.

I think we need to take into account the lattest Spacex presentation.  Only humanoid robots for at least the first few launches.  No humans at all.  …

false. The presentation said no humans in 2026, but possibly in 2028 although more likely in 2031.

Not false, two or three is a few.      If robots can do a task once, they can do it repeatredly.  It's the nature of the beast.
I expect that if robots are totally useless, then people may fly in sooner, if landing and the rest goes ok.

[BN]

humanoid robots will be used to deploy hardware, including certain specialized equipment. they are not mutually exclusive, but rather synergistic as not everything needs to be an autonomous robot. they can also survey the region, perform some science and determine the ideal landing site for heavy equipment, which needs to be positioned much more precisely, close to useful resources.

[Coastal Ron]

...
If robots can do a task once, they can do it repeatredly.

Well, that IS the question, isn't it? Can they do what is needed on Mars?

I expect that if robots are totally useless, then people may fly in sooner, if landing and the rest goes ok.

The whole point for SpaceX is to send humans to Mars. To make Mars a viable colony of humans in case something happens to Earth.

So from that standpoint human occupation of Mars is the whole point of sending any technology to Mars, including humanoid robots. Human robots do not obviate the need for humans, they should create the conditions to allow MORE humans to arrive and live on Mars.

From that standpoint, sending humanoid robots to Mars, along with lots of other technology, makes sense. Especially on the first attempted landings.

All I've been saying is that based on what we have seen and observed here on Earth, that humanoid robots are unlikely to be able to do much on Mars, since they are unable to do much here on Earth. Or as Major Partagaz from the Andor show would say "calibrate your enthusiasm"... 

[BN]

...
If robots can do a task once, they can do it repeatredly.

Well, that IS the question, isn't it? Can they do what is needed on Mars?

I expect that if robots are totally useless, then people may fly in sooner, if landing and the rest goes ok.

The whole point for SpaceX is to send humans to Mars. To make Mars a viable colony of humans in case something happens to Earth.

So from that standpoint human occupation of Mars is the whole point of sending any technology to Mars, including humanoid robots. Human robots do not obviate the need for humans, they should create the conditions to allow MORE humans to arrive and live on Mars.

From that standpoint, sending humanoid robots to Mars, along with lots of other technology, makes sense. Especially on the first attempted landings.

All I've been saying is that based on what we have seen and observed here on Earth, that humanoid robots are unlikely to be able to do much on Mars, since they are unable to do much here on Earth. Or as Major Partagaz from the Andor show would say "calibrate your enthusiasm"... 

you absolutely love the idea of humanoid robots on Mars. so you would agree that the potential utility of having them there clearly outweighs the cost?

and if so, does the same logic apply to lunar missions?

and if so, how long until we see Chinese humanoid robots on the moon..

[Coastal Ron]

...
From that standpoint, sending humanoid robots to Mars, along with lots of other technology, makes sense. Especially on the first attempted landings.

All I've been saying is that based on what we have seen and observed here on Earth, that humanoid robots are unlikely to be able to do much on Mars, since they are unable to do much here on Earth. Or as Major Partagaz from the Andor show would say "calibrate your enthusiasm"... 

you absolutely love the idea of humanoid robots on Mars. so you would agree that the potential utility of having them there clearly outweighs the cost?

As I've stated.

and if so, does the same logic apply to lunar missions?

I am for technologies, robotic or not, that can help us expand humanity out into space.

and if so, how long until we see Chinese humanoid robots on the moon..

Who cares? Are you expecting me to be racist on this topic? 

[Twark_Main]

All I've been saying is that based on what we have seen and observed here on Earth, that humanoid robots are unlikely to be able to do much on Mars, since they are unable to do much here on Earth. Or as Major Partagaz from the Andor show would say "calibrate your enthusiasm"... 

"Past performance does not guarantee future results." 

It's funny because you assume this is true for Mars rockets (I don't hear you objecting that "based on what we have seen and observed here on Earth, rockets are unlikely to be able to get people to Mars"), but simultaneously you can't fathom it being true in the field of robotics technology.

I presume this is because you know enough about rocket technology to "see the path," but the same isn't true for AI and robotics tech.  There's no shame in that, but in that case a little humility would be warranted.

[Coastal Ron]

All I've been saying is that based on what we have seen and observed here on Earth, that humanoid robots are unlikely to be able to do much on Mars, since they are unable to do much here on Earth. Or as Major Partagaz from the Andor show would say "calibrate your enthusiasm"... 

"Past performance does not guarantee future results." 

It's funny because you assume this is true for Mars rockets (I don't hear you objecting that "based on what we have seen and observed here on Earth, rockets are unlikely to be able to get people to Mars"), but simultaneously you can't fathom it being true in the field of robotics technology.

Oh, I have HOPE that Elon Musk will figure out how to get humans to Mars, but as the last three test flights of Starship have shown, hope is not enough.

And I don't have a stake in WHEN people get to Mars. I would be surprised if the schedule Musk laid out happens - as would everyone else that has watched Musk pronounce and then miss dates over the years.

So getting humans is Mars is a "hope" that for me, I don't have a specific date on when it happens, I'll just be happy when it happens during my lifetime (which could still be a big assumption).

I presume this is because you know enough about rocket technology to "see the path," but the same isn't true for AI and robotics tech.  There's no shame in that, but in that case a little humility would be warranted.

I have plenty of humility, but I don't see the same from those that are making claims about what they think humanoid robots will be able to do. And yes, I do base my assumptions on what I know and the "velocity" of change that is happening on many fronts. I have been following the robotics industry since I was in college and built my first end effector.

But unlike getting humans to Mars, which can only be proven by getting humans to Mars, we can prove here on Earth what humanoid robots can and cannot do, to a great degree, on Mars. And so far that is mainly dancing... 

[Twark_Main]

...we can prove here on Earth what humanoid robots... cannot do

We can?  How do you prove a negative?   

You might prove that this robot right here can't do XYZ, but I don't see how you can possibly (honestly) generalize that claim to all humanoid robots ever.

And yes, I do base my assumptions on what I know and the "velocity" of change that is happening on many fronts. I have been following the robotics industry since I was in college and built my first end effector.

That would be the interesting part. We need more specific reasons why based on these experiences, not just general statements.

So getting humans is Mars is a "hope" for me, I don't have a specific date on when it happens

...to a great degree, on Mars. And so far that is mainly dancing...

The incongruity in your timeline expectations between the two technologies remains striking.

Who cares what robots can do "so far."  By your own admission, we care what robots can do at "unspecific date." 

[Coastal Ron]

...we can prove here on Earth what humanoid robots... cannot do

We can?  How do you prove a negative?   

Very easily. Can the Tesla Optimus humanoid robot do "X" today, with "X" being what will be needed on Mars on the first landing?

You might prove that this robot right here can't do XYZ, but I don't see how you can possibly (honestly) generalize that claim to all humanoid robots ever.

I never said that, and that is just you being pedantic again. 

And yes, I do base my assumptions on what I know and the "velocity" of change that is happening on many fronts. I have been following the robotics industry since I was in college and built my first end effector.

That would be the interesting part. We need more specific reasons why based on these experiences, not just general statements.

Hey, I'm not the one claiming that Tesla Optimus humanoid robots can do "X" or "Y" on Mars. I don't need to prove that they can't, the burden is on those that say that it can. Not sure if you understand that... 

[Twark_Main]

...we can prove here on Earth what humanoid robots... cannot do

We can?  How do you prove a negative?   

Very easily. Can the Tesla Optimus humanoid robot do "X" today, with "X" being what will be needed on Mars on the first landing?

"humanoid robots" != "Optimus"

"cannot do today" != "cannot do"


If you want to be specific...  be specific!  But if you write something, I'm going to believe you intended to write that.

You might prove that this robot right here can't do XYZ, but I don't see how you can possibly (honestly) generalize that claim to all humanoid robots ever.

I never said that, and that is just you being pedantic again. 

I mean, you literally did say those words, so you'll forgive me if I had to stoop to reading your words instead of reading your mind. 

And yes, I do base my assumptions on what I know and the "velocity" of change that is happening on many fronts. I have been following the robotics industry since I was in college and built my first end effector.

That would be the interesting part. We need more specific reasons why based on these experiences, not just general statements.

Hey, I'm not the one claiming that Tesla Optimus humanoid robots can do "X" or "Y" on Mars. I don't need to prove that they can't, the burden is on those that say that it can. Not sure if you understand that... 

This isn't debate club, and there's no debate moderator to impress with that sort of talk.  I'm only "burdened" if it bothers me that you'll be wrong predicting the future. 

Quite a shame how, just when we got to the meat and potatoes of the discussion: why you look at the rate of progress in humanoid robotics and are pessimistic, you retreat from the topic and into high school debate club meta-gaming.  I mean how crazy would it have been if we'd actually for a brief moment, you know, intelligently discussed the topic at hand... 

[Coastal Ron]

...I mean how crazy would it have been if we'd actually for a brief moment, you know, intelligently discussed the topic at hand... 

That would be amazing, considering you have not contributed ANYTHING to this topic recently. All you've been doing is complaining about what I HAVE contributed.

So take your own advice, and CONTRIBUTE SOMETHING!

And until you do, I'm not responding to you.

[StraumliBlight]

Interesting interview with the head of Robotics at DeepMind.

[InterestedEngineer]

Interesting interview with the head of Robotics at DeepMind.

interesting how they keep pushing two fingers with no force feedback to do harder tasks, while Tesla has moved on getting far more degrees of freedom and sensory feedback.

(while doing the opposite and getting rid of radar and lasers for self driving).