I enjoyed reading this piece, Mahalet! It gives you a couple of things to think about - especially the environmental impact concerns you raised. Another point to think about is the potential for such robots to be hacked and used for nefarious purposes by someone with criminal intent, as we’ve seen with baby monitors. How do you monitor your child’s interactions with the robot 24/7? How do you ensure that the robot is not being used by such individuals to produce C-SAM materials?
You raise an extremely valid point. I talked to a few people and they raised the case of robots going bad. Which to your point could be caused by hacking. This also points to the need for proper guardrails to protect users. What should be Teslas (or other robot maker) responsibility to ensure this? What sort of mandatory safety standards are needed?
This is how I think household robots will become commonplace. The first generation of these robots will be expensive and buggy. They will mostly be purchased by those rich enough to have them for novelty and influences for creating context. Within a few years, cost will lower, second hand or refurbished models will become more common and more people will start having them in their homes. Once it gets to the point where you go over to a friend house, see it clean, hear how they doesn't have to get up at 5 am to let the dog out and how much time they are saving, more people will start to buy them. Only once the costs lower and the technology becomes reliable, will they start to become common. Until that point they will remain a novelty.
At this point in my life where I value convenience and time more than ever, I’d pay top dollar. Especially when I think about how my life would be once I add kids to the mix while working full time, it would be tremendous help to have such device. However, I would be weary about what the limit is for the robot. What are its max capabilities and do I have the ability to control or is it programmed to push boundaries? I am not sure.
That’s a great point. Since these are robots, I think it’s almost certain they’ll collect data. The real question is whether that data use—and the robot’s behavior more broadly—is actually controlled and customized by the human owner, or primarily by the firm that designed it.
Ideally, owners should be able to set clear boundaries: what the robot can do, what it can learn, and what data it can retain or share. But relying on “ideal” design isn’t enough. Regulation needs to step up to define what these systems are allowed to do—and just as importantly, what they’re not allowed to do—before those boundaries are quietly set for us.
"I think your point is vital because the transition from 'appliance' to 'agent' is where the real friction happens. We have laws for dishwashers (warranties), but we don't have laws for an entity that walks the dog or tutors the kids.
Being proactive with a legal framework—defining the scope of this intelligence—is actually a prerequisite for the 'social success' you mention. It’s the only way to mitigate the fear that naturally comes with inviting a new form of intelligence into our homes."
That’s a great point! Along with your thought is the degree to which the robot collects data from the household and whether the robot makers intend to access that information and use it to their advantage. These aspects need proper regulation.
I enjoyed reading this piece, Mahalet! It gives you a couple of things to think about - especially the environmental impact concerns you raised. Another point to think about is the potential for such robots to be hacked and used for nefarious purposes by someone with criminal intent, as we’ve seen with baby monitors. How do you monitor your child’s interactions with the robot 24/7? How do you ensure that the robot is not being used by such individuals to produce C-SAM materials?
You raise an extremely valid point. I talked to a few people and they raised the case of robots going bad. Which to your point could be caused by hacking. This also points to the need for proper guardrails to protect users. What should be Teslas (or other robot maker) responsibility to ensure this? What sort of mandatory safety standards are needed?
This is how I think household robots will become commonplace. The first generation of these robots will be expensive and buggy. They will mostly be purchased by those rich enough to have them for novelty and influences for creating context. Within a few years, cost will lower, second hand or refurbished models will become more common and more people will start having them in their homes. Once it gets to the point where you go over to a friend house, see it clean, hear how they doesn't have to get up at 5 am to let the dog out and how much time they are saving, more people will start to buy them. Only once the costs lower and the technology becomes reliable, will they start to become common. Until that point they will remain a novelty.
This is a very realistic trajectory, and it aligns well with how many other past technologies diffused into everyday life.
At this point in my life where I value convenience and time more than ever, I’d pay top dollar. Especially when I think about how my life would be once I add kids to the mix while working full time, it would be tremendous help to have such device. However, I would be weary about what the limit is for the robot. What are its max capabilities and do I have the ability to control or is it programmed to push boundaries? I am not sure.
That’s a great point. Since these are robots, I think it’s almost certain they’ll collect data. The real question is whether that data use—and the robot’s behavior more broadly—is actually controlled and customized by the human owner, or primarily by the firm that designed it.
Ideally, owners should be able to set clear boundaries: what the robot can do, what it can learn, and what data it can retain or share. But relying on “ideal” design isn’t enough. Regulation needs to step up to define what these systems are allowed to do—and just as importantly, what they’re not allowed to do—before those boundaries are quietly set for us.
"I think your point is vital because the transition from 'appliance' to 'agent' is where the real friction happens. We have laws for dishwashers (warranties), but we don't have laws for an entity that walks the dog or tutors the kids.
Being proactive with a legal framework—defining the scope of this intelligence—is actually a prerequisite for the 'social success' you mention. It’s the only way to mitigate the fear that naturally comes with inviting a new form of intelligence into our homes."
That’s a great point! Along with your thought is the degree to which the robot collects data from the household and whether the robot makers intend to access that information and use it to their advantage. These aspects need proper regulation.