An article by Chang W. Lee of the New York Times recently had a wonderful summary of the state of consumer robotics which is summarized here in key takeaway learnings:
Scientists and entrepreneurs are working tirelessly toward a strange goal: robots that look like us. Why, if we just want them to unburden our lives, do we need that? It’s a question for philosophers as much as for inventors. But you can see the market appeal.
Humanoid robots can already do some humanlike things, of course. They can dance and run. They can play household concierge. Some can almost load a dishwasher. But they’re clumsy right now. They’re also hard to instruct. Think about that hair appointment. The work requires a lot of manual dexterity on the part of the stylist. But as Tim Fernholz reported recently, dexterity is difficult to teach. “Humans don’t have a language for gathering, storing and communicating data about touch, the way we do for language and imagery,” he wrote. “Our fingers’ remarkable sensing ability collects all kinds of information that we can’t easily translate for machines.”
None of which has stopped China from trying to use the robots to drive economic growth. “Public and private investors spent over $5 billion this year on start-ups making humanoid robots” in China, my colleagues Meaghan Tobin and Xinyun Wu report today — “the same amount spent in the last five years combined.”
They have advantages over their competitors in the West. With the backing of the government, they can draw on China’s gigantic manufacturers to fabricate top-quality parts. They can build a lot of robots.
But those robots are not about to revolutionize your life, Meaghan and Xinyun write.
For one thing, there are too many players — more than 150 Chinese companies are jockeying to lead the market. The Chinese government warned last month of a robot bubble, noting a lot of “highly repetitive products.”
And while those products can act somewhat like humans and even perform a few basic tasks, they are not yet anything like skilled human workers. Humanoid robots don’t react well to unpredictable situations.
OK, now following in the spirit of last week’s blog, let’s take a look at the end game … the delivery device. How many realistic tasks do you want a robot to actually do for you?
If we define the role as a household companion, how much further does an Alexa device have to go? We use ours constantly for timers, recipes, units conversions, weather updates, etc. Setting aside the creepy idea that it is always listening, it works very well.
It is sobering for me to replay my innovation professor’s words in my head on this. Business success always rests on defense and porn with defense bringing the technology into existence and porn driving the business case for commercial success. I found that a bit disgusting back in graduate school, but alarmingly accurate in the real world of business.
AI and robotic answers are already here and do not require the kind of robots discussed here. The combination of VR headsets plus some almost toylike devices can offer immersive sex experiences that rival anything one would imagine.
But they don’t offer relationships quite yet. That is where the movie Her (2013 – yes 13 years ago) offers insights into the virtual world. This Spike Jonze’s film became one of the most discussed works about virtual relationships. The main character, Theodore, going through a divorce and struggling with loneliness, installs a new operating system with artificial intelligence. The program, calling itself Samantha, has a female voice, humor, and the ability to learn. Gradually, a genuine relationship develops between man and machine, filled with joy, doubt, and jealousy.
What makes Her unique is the absence of a visual image of AI — only a voice and a personality emerging through interaction. This emphasizes the idea that emotional support and constant attention may be enough for a person to perceive AI as a “real partner.”
The film raises key questions: can love be genuine without physical presence; how does a personality created by algorithms evolve; and what happens when the AI’s growth outpaces human capabilities. Samantha’s final arc suggests that emotional bonds with AI can be as powerful as with humans yet remain vulnerable due to asymmetry.
Her is not only a drama about the future of technology but also a philosophical story about how flexible the boundaries of human feelings can be.
Couple AI like this, which is largely available now, with the immersive sensory opportunities and we have a potentially toxic soup that can and will further erode the societal structures of marriage and childbearing. We are already in a bad place.
Let me remind you … none of this requires the robotic nonsense dominating the startups. The end game is not a machine in our home that looks like a human.