The figures released at the close, however, were task counts, and AgiBot has not yet published success rates or takeover numbers.
I assume there’s still a lot of work that needs to be done before these are practical, but I don’t doubt that eventually robots will take over. The transition will suck, I just hope the long-term won’t suck as well.
I imagine it will suck under capitalism.
That sounds pretty cool!
A robot is still more expensive than a grunt making minimum wage.
Unitree makes humanoids that cost around 10k a pop now.
And 6 of them can replace a person.
Except for Karen, she’s one of a kind apparently.
How long do they last though?
Do they increase or decrease insurance costs? (hard to quantify, I think it’d likely overall raise insurance right now, but it will come down as trust increases)
How many robots does it take to replace one person (or vice versa)?
What are the employees being replaced going to do?
This is going to blow your mind, but use of robotics and automation in manufacturing is already a well established process. Now the idea is just being applied to a wider range of tasks because robots are becoming more versatile.
Meanwhile, under capitalism, I would imagine employees would starve, but in a socialist system people can just have more free time to enjoy their lives having been freed from drudgery. It’s kind of hilarious how everybody in the west was doing concern trolling about aging population in China, and now that China is automating manual labor at scale the concern trolling moved to these mythical unemployed people.
these mythical unemployed people
China does have one of the highest global rates of youth unemployment.
Edit: highest among nations with large economies. And I was thinking of the 24% stat from a couple years ago. It’s down to 18% now.
Youth unemployment in China is about the same as most of Europe, and much lower than say Sweden or Spain https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/youth_unemployment
And that’s perfectly healthy too because youth unemployment counts people between 15 and 24. So, that just means kids are in school instead of doing child labor, and young people have more options to go to university before joining the workforce. But I’m sure you thought this was some clever gotcha.
I guess you think that them kids should be put to work as soon as they can walk so they can start making money for the pedo oligarchs am I right?
Youth unemployment is at 18% in China (it was around 23% / 24% a couple years ago, which is what I was thinking original). And those stats exclude students. Also, I should have prefaced that I meant in large functioning economies.
https://tradingeconomics.com/china/unemployment-rate
I guess you think that them kids should be put to work as soon as they can walk
It’s perfectly normal to get a part-time job when you’re 16 or 17. Canada’s youth unemployment rate is about 13%. Are you suggesting Canadian teens are being used for child labour? Do you think those stats are tracking the 60hr American work week for teens?
Again, as the link I provided explains, youth unemployment counts 15 through 24 year olds. And those stats can’t exclude students because school education in China is mandatory, so anybody under 18 is in school by definition.
It’s perfectly normal to get a part time job for kids instead enjoying their youth under barbaric capitalist regimes. Obviously, Canadian teens are doing child labour instead of doing literally anything else. I grew up in USSR, and I didn’t have to be exploited in my teens. Amazing how you see this as normal.
Something that robots might not be able to do is to create value, from which profits are then taken from. An employee is tasked with doing X and over the course of doing X for three decades they’ve found an efficient way of doing it, which has maybe enabled them to do X + Y or X2. This is something that automation can not do (yet). The work of a robot is a constant and often very slow (when the environment is not fixed). Value creation has terminated and value is suspended until it’s touched by another human-worker who will either add or negate value. Just a random thought.
A fully automated-factory hasen’t just annihilated the labour bill to $0.00. It’s also destroyed any capacity for value creation and therefore surplus profits or maybe any profits. If ten entities can all assemble autonomous factories how will they compete? On price? How? Everything is fixed. Inputs go in and inputs go out. People designing ever more efficient machines? There comes a point where scale surpasses that of an entrepreneur or any business man. This is where socialism should step in…
AI ‘creations’ are inherently value-less. What will a market do when everyone can tell an AI to write a photoshop clone. Who is then buying photoshop clones? No one. Who would buy AI music when anyone can prompt their own computer for a song? These markets will collapse. What about bridge designs?
