Human-like robots infused with the transforming power of artificial intelligence: a science fiction staple now in the realm of the possible. But just because we can doesn’t mean we should. What does it mean that humans want to create artificial life forms modeled after our own bodies and minds?
These efforts are already naturally expanding into commerce and industry. Humanoid robots can bring significant economic benefits by fitting into existing human roles and spaces without overhauling infrastructure. But the idea goes back much further than the 1984 blockbuster film The Terminator.
“Robots have a long history that goes back to the Egyptians, who have always tried to create lifelike creatures,” said Ken Goldberg, a professor of industrial engineering at UC Berkeley. decryption. “We have been fascinated by these for thousands of years. It could be said that all art seeks to create, in some way, an expression of life.”
As Goldberg explains, this fascination with creating humanoid robots was first recorded in the myth of Osiris, who was dismembered by Set and then put back together and resurrected by Isis in the 24th century BC. This lineage continues through ancient stories such as Pygmalion in ancient Greece, the Golem in 16th-century Europe, and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein in 1818.
These narratives carry an ongoing theme of being careful about “playing God,” Goldberg said. But the desire for humanoid robots is often rooted in much less sacred purposes.
“One is a kind of utilitarian goal, which is what Elon Musk and others are pursuing.” Goldberg said. “A lot of the work that’s going on right now, which is why people invest in companies like Figure, is hoping that these things will work and be compatible,” he said, especially in the area of space exploration.
Last October, Meta launched Habitat 3, which aims to enhance AI capabilities to enable human-robot co-living through advanced virtual 3D simulations that can lead to better interaction and collaboration. Last January, Open AI-backed startup 1X raised $100 million for NEO, a bipedal robot for working from home and a new challenger to dominant robotics companies like Boston Dynamics.
Further out in the mainstream, the idea of AI-infused sex robots raises tangled ethical questions.
goldbergHe, who is also chief scientist at Ambi Robotics, said interest in investing in AI-based machines is largely driven by hype.
“This is not the stage for success,” he said. “It’s really important to point out this: There’s a lot of exaggeration and inflated expectations out there.”
During last year’s SAG-AFTRA/WGA strike, AI was a key element in union contract negotiations with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP), with creative professionals concerned that AI could be replaced by technology and become obsolete.
But while generative AI models like OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Anthropic’s Claude and Google Gemini may be met with scathing responses from artists and writers, Goldberg says robots continue to struggle with tasks that require human physical dexterity, such as assembling products. explained. He said Android cannot yet replace blue-collar jobs in fields such as manufacturing, cooking and construction.
But human dominance may be short-lived.
Last October, technology company Nvidia made waves in the field of robotics when it announced Eureka AI, which surpasses previous methods by enabling robotic hands to perform tasks with human-like dexterity. .
Goldberg said that for consumer-grade robots, safety and environmental considerations must be addressed by policymakers, especially for vulnerable populations such as the elderly. He emphasized the need for less powerful robots and comprehensive safety inspections, with research focused on preventing injuries and ensuring public safety, just like existing industrial safeguards.
Goldberg said he’s open to having a personal robot, especially as he gets older. But he said he didn’t want it to look human.
“That’s where we get into the uncanny valley,” he said. “I want the robot to look like a robot. It can do certain things, but I don’t want it to be confused with a real person.”
The uncanny valley refers to the discomfort humans feel when encountering surreal images or shapes that are similar to humans but not realistic.
“People like to go to the uncanny valley to get attention,” he said. “It’s very surprising.”
Robots like Hanson Robotics’ Desdemona and Sophia are examples of the uncanny valley effect, Goldberg said, but he emphasized that they are not full-fledged androids.
“These are dolls, not robots. “It’s often controlled by someone in another room,” he said. “Even if it’s on automatic pilot, your repertoire of specific expressions is limited, but just enough to make you uncomfortable.”
Nonetheless, Goldberg praised Hanson Robotics founder David Hanson as one of the best at what he does.
“David Hanson is very smart and talented and very good at what he does,” he said.
Despite the hype, if the technology wants to be adopted by the public, companies designing humanoid robots may need to be among the first to adopt them.
“Wheels are great in a warehouse, but at home they can be problematic,” Goldberg said. “Most homes have carpet and stairs, where wheels are really lacking and legs can be useful.”
Goldberg expects these improvements to become commonplace within the next decade. However, a major barrier is the high cost of developing and manufacturing robots.
“I think it’s too expensive right now,” Goldberg said. “But it would be useful if we could bring the price down and really work out the details of being able to do certain tasks, like picking up items off the floor or clearing the floor.”
Edited by Ryan Ozawa.
