What is the way to go in hobby robotics today? I'm more interested in high level, and want the lower level to 'just work' with minimum efforts from my side. Having mechanical part and vision what would be the right choice for low-middle software to control robotic arm and car, may be attached one to another. ROS2?
The "Berkeley Humanoid" is a distinct robot (they have the "Berkeley Humanoid Lite" named "ours" and colored in orange as the rightmost point on their graph).
I have long assumed that we won’t be getting robot butlers partly because it’s really really hard, but also because most of not all things we want robots for it’s easier to reconfigure the environment than make a flexible humaniod
So factories are obvious but the real mass uptake is the home - and honestly I think something that cleans and tidies an hour a day might actually be achievable
As much as I like the concept, 3D printing everything is not the way to lower cost.
Mass-produced (stamped / extruded / whatever) mechanical parts + hackable 'brains' is.
Robots do lend themselves well w/ respect to that last part. Worst case is rip out its control electronics wholesale & replace with your own motor drivers etc.
Hm, perhaps not - but maybe give the users an option to print such parts, and warn that they may affect longevity of said parts if they do decide to go full manufacturing route.
My potential concern is the "Apple" gatekeeping of parts.
It depends what you're doing. High volume parts, absolutely. It's one of the things that bugs me about the "3D printers printing printers" type projects. 3D printing is terrible for mass producing parts. If you're making 1000+ of something, injection mold it.
Low volume, probably customized parts like R&D robotics tends to need? 3D printing is great, especially if the design files are available so you can modify the parts as required before printing. And then if you break something you can print another one off overnight instead of stalling your project for weeks waiting for new parts to arrive.
the cost-effectiveness/performance factor benchmark is interesting, but it feels slightly misleading - I just don't see how "average peak torque of all actuated DoFs, normalized by the robot's size" is related to measuring "accessibility and customizability" of the robot.
What is interesting is that on their own metric, the Berkley Humanoid is only twice as expensive as the Berkley Humanoid Lite but has more than twice the "performance factor" (0.36 vs 0.14).
It shows they threw away too much while creating the lite version.
Depends on the relative market size for performance factor though. If 90 percent of the market is captured by a 0.14 performance factor then that extra in price could be put towards solving another problem.
Rather, I think we can say based on those datapoints that for their design, performance scales superlinearly with cost. Not surprising given fixed costs!
The comment criticizes a chart or metric comparing "performance factor" to torque and degrees of freedom (DOFs) in robotics, calling it "the most silly thing" the commenter, a licensed mechanical engineer, has seen. By referencing "Kony 2012"—a widely mocked internet campaign—they emphasize their point about the chart's perceived absurdity. ([The performance factor vs. torque vs. DOFs is the most silly thing as ...](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43801052&utm_source=cha...))
The critique likely stems from the idea that combining performance factor, torque, and DOFs into a single comparison oversimplifies complex engineering concepts. Torque and DOFs are distinct mechanical properties, and "performance factor" is a vague term without a clear definition. Such a chart might misleadingly suggest direct correlations where none exist, leading to confusion or misinterpretation.
In essence, the commenter is expressing frustration over what they see as a technically flawed and potentially misleading representation of robotic performance metrics.
A) bring down cost and expand the design space for the hardware and
B) minimise the barriers to working on the "software" problems where there still seem to be huge areas of mostly unaddressed challenges.
An open source platform seems like a good thing for both.
why does it say the Berkeley Humanoid is closed source here? Is it a typo, was this paper peer-reviewed?
So factories are obvious but the real mass uptake is the home - and honestly I think something that cleans and tidies an hour a day might actually be achievable
Mass-produced (stamped / extruded / whatever) mechanical parts + hackable 'brains' is.
Robots do lend themselves well w/ respect to that last part. Worst case is rip out its control electronics wholesale & replace with your own motor drivers etc.
My potential concern is the "Apple" gatekeeping of parts.
Low volume, probably customized parts like R&D robotics tends to need? 3D printing is great, especially if the design files are available so you can modify the parts as required before printing. And then if you break something you can print another one off overnight instead of stalling your project for weeks waiting for new parts to arrive.
It shows they threw away too much while creating the lite version.
The comment criticizes a chart or metric comparing "performance factor" to torque and degrees of freedom (DOFs) in robotics, calling it "the most silly thing" the commenter, a licensed mechanical engineer, has seen. By referencing "Kony 2012"—a widely mocked internet campaign—they emphasize their point about the chart's perceived absurdity. ([The performance factor vs. torque vs. DOFs is the most silly thing as ...](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43801052&utm_source=cha...))
The critique likely stems from the idea that combining performance factor, torque, and DOFs into a single comparison oversimplifies complex engineering concepts. Torque and DOFs are distinct mechanical properties, and "performance factor" is a vague term without a clear definition. Such a chart might misleadingly suggest direct correlations where none exist, leading to confusion or misinterpretation.
In essence, the commenter is expressing frustration over what they see as a technically flawed and potentially misleading representation of robotic performance metrics.
https://youtu.be/0Gkl1H2eKsM?t=99
Servitude: Robot Waiter:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXsUetUzXlg
Empathy: Broken Robot:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXrbqXPnHvE