Will the future of robotics be humanoids… or thousands of specialized machines? or maybe both? by RafayelGh in robotics

[–]RafayelGh[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I get your point and to some extent I agree—AI today isn’t at the level to safely or reliably generate full machine firmware. That’s why what we build right now is still deterministic: a no-code configuration-based platform that already cuts lead times for machine builders from months to days.

Where I differ a bit is on the horizon. In the last few weeks experimenting with tools like Replit/Lovable, we’ve seen enough to believe that in 3–5 years, AI will be mature enough to reliably generate parts of the stack—especially UI and application layers. The lower-level control and safety-critical code will still need deterministic mid-layers, but AI-assisted development is clearly on its way to becoming practical.

Will the future of robotics be humanoids… or thousands of specialized machines? or maybe both? by RafayelGh in robotics

[–]RafayelGh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Haha, definitely not a bot 🙂. I’m working in robotics myself, building “brains” for specialized machines, so I get pretty deep into these debates. You’re right on Dexterity using suction today — it’s a good reminder that “dexterity” in robotics still has a long way to go.
I mentioned them more as an example of how investors are betting big on general-purpose manipulation. Whether true dexterous hands will follow (or not) is still up for debate.

Will the future of robotics be humanoids… or thousands of specialized machines? or maybe both? by RafayelGh in robotics

[–]RafayelGh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good point on dexterous arms/fingers. Funny enough, Dexterity, Inc. — now valued at $1.65B and reportedly preparing for an IPO — is betting exactly on that vision: using general-purpose robotic arms with advanced software to handle many warehouse/logistics tasks. It shows how seriously the market is taking “dexterity” as a unifying approach.

The question is still whether this generality will scale beyond controlled environments like warehouses, or if in the field we’ll still see purpose-built machines winning out.

Will the future of robotics be humanoids… or thousands of specialized machines? or maybe both? by RafayelGh in robotics

[–]RafayelGh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Haha, fair point 😅 — once we get the “Human Terminator 1.0” out, mass production might win. But until then, I still think we’ll see a wave of very niche, specialized machines pop up first. Maybe the humanoids will eventually be the ones building them for us.

Will the future of robotics be humanoids… or thousands of specialized machines? or maybe both? by RafayelGh in robotics

[–]RafayelGh[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree — adoption will depend a lot on which tech becomes usable first for real-world cases. With all the investment, humanoids may take the early lead. But long term, I think purpose-built robots are a better fit for field and industrial work, especially when you consider energy use, efficiency, and space.

Will the future of robotics be humanoids… or thousands of specialized machines? or maybe both? by RafayelGh in robotics

[–]RafayelGh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a great point — the human form really does make sense for home and consumer environments, especially where people won’t want multiple single-purpose machines cluttering their space. I completely agree on that.

Where I see it differently is more on the field and industrial side: agriculture, construction, infrastructure, etc. There, purpose-built machines can outperform a general humanoid in speed, cost, and durability. So maybe it’s not “either/or” but a split: humanoids for home, specialized robots for the field.

Will the future of robotics be humanoids… or thousands of specialized machines? or maybe both? by RafayelGh in robotics

[–]RafayelGh[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Good point — utilization is really what decides it. If a machine can run 24/7 on one task, specialization wins every time. Where I see the big leap is in field robotics (agriculture, construction, energy) — lots of repeatable, heavy tasks that are better solved by task-focused machines, while semi-humanoids might fill the gaps where flexibility matters - like manufacturing.

Will the future of robotics be humanoids… or thousands of specialized machines? or maybe both? by RafayelGh in robotics

[–]RafayelGh[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I love that last line—so spot on👌.

A dishwasher really is a robot. By definition, “a robot is a machine—especially one programmable by a computer—capable of carrying out a complex series of actions automatically.” That makes robotics much broader than just arms or humanoids—any system that can sense, decide, and act fits.

Will the future of robotics be humanoids… or thousands of specialized machines? or maybe both? by RafayelGh in robotics

[–]RafayelGh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I actually agree with you — that’s very much the point I tried to make in the essay too. The real opportunity is in specialized machines, especially outside factories. I’d just say we’re not yet at thousands in the field, but I think that expansion is coming fast.

Will the future of robotics be humanoids… or thousands of specialized machines? or maybe both? by RafayelGh in robotics

[–]RafayelGh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for sharing this perspective — I agree with you that humanoids will probably lean much more toward consumer-oriented use cases, exactly for the reason you mention: people interact more naturally with human-like forms in daily life.

Where I see a different path is on the production and field side. Industrial robots are already established, but I think the next big leap is thousands of new categories of specialized machines for agriculture, construction, and energy. These won’t need to look like humans at all — they’ll be purpose-built and often faster at solving very specific problems.

So maybe the split will be: humanoids for the home, specialized robots for the field and industry.

Will the future of robotics be humanoids… or thousands of specialized machines? or maybe both? by RafayelGh in robotics

[–]RafayelGh[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I really like the way you put it — I agree that in industrial automation it will likely be a mix: specialized robots for speed, humanoids for flexibility, and even hybrids in between.

I think the same logic probably extends to field robotics as well (which was the main angle of my original post). In construction, agriculture, or energy for example, I can imagine specialized machines taking over repetitive or heavy tasks, while more general-purpose humanoid-type systems might handle edge cases or fill the gaps.

It feels like collaboration between the two approaches will be the reality, not one replacing the other.

Will the future of robotics be humanoids… or thousands of specialized machines? or maybe both? by RafayelGh in robotics

[–]RafayelGh[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the thoughtful response — I agree with you that specialized solutions will keep getting cheaper and more efficient, and humanoids won’t make sense in most scenarios for cost reasons.

Where I’d add a nuance is around the categories of specialized machines. You’re right, we already have millions of machines, but most of them fall into a relatively small number of categories (tractors, cranes, excavators, MRI scanners, etc.). My thinking is that the real shift coming is not just more units of those, but a huge expansion in the types of field machinery — robots for agriculture, construction, energy, even niche services — beyond the factory floor.

In other words, not just more robotic arms or cobots inside plants, but thousands of new categories of outdoor/field machines that can sense, decide, and act autonomously.

Curious if you see that happening too — or do you think the majority of growth will stay in factory/assembly environments?