Connect with us

Tech

Humans keep building robots that are shaped like us—what’s the point?

Published

on

Humans keep building robots that are shaped like us—what’s the point?


Robots come in a vast array of shapes and sizes. By definition, they’re machines that perform automatic tasks and can be operated by humans, but sometimes work autonomously—without human help.

Most of these machines are built for a specific purpose: think of the puck-shaped robot vacuum or a robotic assembly arm in a factory. But recently, human-shaped or have increasingly entered the spotlight.

Humanoid robots are exactly what they sound like—machines with arms, legs, a torso and a head, typically walking upright on two legs. Investment in humanoid robot development has been skyrocketing recently. If you have several thousand dollars, some are already available for purchase.

But why is there so much interest in human-shaped robots? What are they good for, apart from showcases such as Beijing’s World Humanoid Robot Games or funky dance routine videos?

A machine just like us

A robot vacuum is a single-purpose machine. The promise of humanoid robots is they might work as general-purpose platforms, doing multiple tasks in various environments.

That’s because robots similar in shape to humans can potentially better fit into human environments—ones already designed for bodies and physical capabilities such as ours.

A robot vacuum—or any other machine with wheels—can’t climb the stairs. In principle, humanoids would be much more mobile in busy human environments, able to climb stairs, use doors, navigate and reach diverse spaces not just at home, but our workplaces, streets and the outdoors.

Humanoid robots existed in entertainment long before humans actually built one. From Maschinenmensch in Fritz Lang’s 1927 film Metropolis to C-3PO in Star Wars, they’ve influenced our imagination. Of course, these were costumed actors—real humanoid robots didn’t start walking until WABOT-1 in 1972, built in Japan.

A lucrative industry?

Developers, manufacturers and investors have been betting big on humanoid robots and believe they will have an enormous impact on society.

Last year, a Goldman Sachs report estimated the global market for humanoid robots would be US$38 billion by 2035 (A$58 billion), with between 3 million and 27 million humanoid robots installed worldwide. They could be “particularly appealing” for dangerous tasks, potentially saving the lives of human workers who could delegate hazardous jobs to robots.

A 2025 Bank of America report estimates there will be 1 million humanoid robots sold annually by 2030, and a staggering 3 billion humanoid robots in service by 2060—that’s almost one humanoid for every three humans.

Even conservative estimates of the future number of humanoid robots signal a significant shift across nearly all aspects of society.

However, to achieve this impact humanoids would truly need to be everywhere, including entertainment, care, home, services and hospitality.

In reality, the path to a multi-talented, general-purpose robot is still a fair way off.






We’re not yet living in the future

Building a machine that can move like a human is notoriously difficult.

In recent years, humanoid robots have vastly improved thanks in large part to artificial intelligence (AI) learning algorithms that are augmenting and even replacing previous robot programming methods.

AI methods such as are generating more robust walking, running and high-level skills that adjust better to uneven terrain and external challenges like being pushed or bumped.

But machines like those these robot kick-boxers are still under human control when deciding which moves to do, although they can autonomously keep balance even when doing complex kicks and punches.

General logic, situational and socially appropriate awareness are also still rather basic. Robots need help from humans to act appropriately. For example, humanoid robots don’t understand the physical, social and cultural differences in how to appropriately engage with a baby, a child, an adult or an older person.

The game-changer that could give us truly general-purpose humanoid robots would have to be an ability to draw on human knowledge and skills directly. For example, you could show a robot how to wash the dishes and it would then copy your behavior.

To do so, however, robots also need to become more adaptable to different environments—not just the lab they were trained in.

Recently, AI learning techniques such as imitation learning or learning from demonstration and deep reinforcement learning that uses powerful algorithms have been showing great results in speeding up how robots pick up new, complex skills from examples.

The next smartphone?

Current predictions for when humanoids will be in your home vary widely. While some robots are already tested in home environments, others suggest consumer applications could be five to ten years away.

Companies such as Boston Dynamics (Hyundai), Tesla, Unitree, Figure AI, Agility, UBTech and many more are now vying for a place in a future market they think could be as big as the car industry and “as ubiquitous as smartphones.”

However, critics argue robot designs still need to improve to truly match human dexterity.

If humanoid robots really do enter our homes en masse, the future social impact could be enormous and is little understood. It will require concerted leadership from business, government, research and public to see that such a momentous change has a positive impact on people’s lives.

And while this future is not yet certain, it’s one we’ve been collectively imagining for at least 100 years.

Provided by
The Conversation


This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Citation:
Humans keep building robots that are shaped like us—what’s the point? (2025, August 20)
retrieved 20 August 2025
from https://techxplore.com/news/2025-08-humans-robots.html

This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no
part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.





Source link

Tech

Here’s Why Trump Posted About Iran ‘Stealing’ the 2020 Election Hours After the US Attacked

Published

on

Here’s Why Trump Posted About Iran ‘Stealing’ the 2020 Election Hours After the US Attacked


At 2:30 am Eastern time on Saturday, President Donald Trump posted a video to his Truth Social account announcing that the US had joined Israel in launching attacks on Iran.

His next post, just two hours later, appeared to suggest that the attacks were, at least in part, motivated by a wild claim that Iran had helped rig the 2020 US elections. “Iran tried to interfere in 2020, 2024 elections to stop Trump, and now faces renewed war with United States,” the president wrote on Truth Social.

The post linked to an article on Just the News, a conspiracy-filled, pro-Trump outlet that offered no explanation for its claim beyond the vague assertion that Iran operated “a sophisticated election influence effort” in 2020.

The White House did not respond to a request for comment on whether the alleged interference factored into the decision to attack Iran or what exactly the so-called interference amounted to.

Trump has spent the years since 2020 boosting numerous baseless conspiracy theories about the 2020 election being rigged. Since his return to the White House last year, he has empowered his administration to use those debunked conspiracy theories to inform decisionmaking, from election office raids in Fulton County, Georgia, to lawsuits over unredacted voter rolls.

It’s not exactly clear what supposed Iranian interference Trump was alluding to in his Truth Social post, but Patrick Byrne, a prominent conspiracy theorist who urged Trump to seize voting machines in the wake of the 2020 election, claims to WIRED that it is related to a broader conspiracy theory that also involves Venezuela and China.

Like most election-related conspiracy theories, this one is convoluted and based on no concrete evidence. In broad terms, the conspiracy theory, which first emerged in the weeks and months after the 2020 election and has grown more complex in the years since, claims that the Venezuelan government has been rigging elections across the globe for decades by creating the voting software company Smartmatic as a vehicle to remotely rig elections. (Smartmatic has repeatedly denied all allegations against it and successfully sued right-wing outlet Newsmax for promoting conspiracy theories and defaming the company.)

Byrne laid out the entire conspiracy theory in a 45-minute-long presentation posted to X in 2024. His claims have been widely shared within the election-denial community since it was posted.

Iran’s role in all of this, claims Byrne, was to hide the money trail. “They act as paymasters. They keep certain payments that would reveal this [operation] out of the banking system, out of the Swift system so you can’t see it,” claimed Byrne during this presentation “It’s done through a transfer pricing mechanism run through Iran in oil.”

When asked for evidence of Iran’s role in this conspiracy theory, Byrne did not respond. In fact, none of Byrne’s claims have ever been verified, and most have been repeatedly debunked. Smartmatic did not immediately respond to a request to comment.

There have been two actual documented instances of Iranian election interference, however: In 2021, the Justice Department charged two Iranians for conducting an influence operation designed to target and threaten US voters. And in 2024, the three Iranian hackers working for the government were charged with compromising the Trump campaign as part of an effort to disrupt the 2024 election.

Byrne’s allegations, however, have been wholly different. And while Byrne’s claims have been circulating among online conspiracy groups for years, they have been emailed directly to Trump in recent months by Peter Ticktin, a lawyer who has known Trump since they attended the New York Military Academy together. Ticktin also represents former Colorado election official turned election denial superstar Tina Peters.



Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

A Possible US Government iPhone-Hacking Toolkit Is Now in the Hands of Foreign Spies and Criminals

Published

on

A Possible US Government iPhone-Hacking Toolkit Is Now in the Hands of Foreign Spies and Criminals


Google notes that Apple patched vulnerabilities used by Coruna in the latest versions of its mobile operating system, iOS 26, so its exploitation techniques are only confirmed to work against iOS 13 through 17.2.1. It targets vulnerabilities in Apple’s Webkit framework for browsers, so Safari users on those older versions of iOS would be vulnerable, but there’s no confirmed techniques in the toolkit for targeting Chrome users. Google also notes that Coruna checks if an iOS devices has Apple’s most stringent security setting, known as Lockdown Mode, enabled, and doesn’t attempt to hack it if so.

Despite those limitations, iVerify says Coruna likely infected tens of thousands of phones. The company consulted with a partner that has access to network traffic and counted visits to a command-and-control server for the cybercriminal version of Coruna infecting Chinese-language websites. The volume of those connections suggest, iVerify says, that roughly 42,000devices may have already been hacked with the toolkit in the for-profit campaign alone.

Just how many other victims Coruna may have hit, including Ukrainians who visited websites infected with the code by the suspected Russian espionage operation, remains unclear. Google declined to comment beyond its published report. Apple did not immediately provide comment on Google or iVerify’s findings.

In iVerify’s analysis of the cybercriminal version of Coruna—it didn’t have access to any of the earlier versions—the company found that the code appeared to have been altered to plant malware on target devices designed to drain cryptocurrency from crypto wallets as well as steal photos and, in some cases, emails. Those additions, however, were “poorly written” compared to the underlying Coruna toolkit, according to iVerify chief product officer Spencer Parker, which he found to be impressively polished and modular.

“My god, these things are very professionally written,” Parker says of the exploits included in Coruna, suggesting that the cruder malware was added by the cybercriminals who later obtained that code.

As for the clues that suggest Coruna’s origins as a US government toolkit, iVerify’s Cole notes that it’s possible that Coruna’s code overlap with the Operation Triangulation code that Russia pinned on US hackers could be based on Triangulation’s components being picked up and repurposed after they were discovered. But Cole argues that’s unlikely. Many components of Coruna have never been seen before, he points out, and the whole toolkit appears to have been created by a “single author,” as he puts it.

“The framework holds together very well,” says Cole, who previously worked at the NSA, but notes that he’s been out of the government for more than a decade and isn’t basing any findings on his own outdated knowledge of US hacking tools. “It looks like it was written as a whole. It doesn’t look like it was pieced together.”

If Coruna is, in fact, a US hacking toolkit gone rogue, just how it got into foreign and criminal hands remains a mystery. But Cole points to the industry of brokers that may pay tens of millions of dollars for zero-day hacking techniques that they can resell for espionage, cybercrime, or cyberwar. Notably, Peter Williams, an executive of US government contractor Trenchant, was sentenced this month to seven years in prison for selling hacking tools to the Russian zero-day broker Operation Zero from 2022 to 2025. Williams’ sentencing memo notes that Trenchant sold hacking tools to the US intelligence community as well as others in the “Five Eyes” group of English-speaking governments—the US, UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand—though it’s not clear what specific tools he sold or what devices they targeted.

“These zero-day and exploit brokers tend to be unscrupulous,” says Cole. “They sell to the highest bidder and they double dip. Many don’t have exclusivity arrangements. That’s very likely what happened here.”

“One of these tools ended up in the hands of a non-Western exploit broker, and they sold it to whoever was willing to pay,” Cole concludes. “The genie is out of the bottle.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Apple’s New MacBook Air and MacBook Pro Have New Chips, More Storage, and Higher Prices

Published

on

Apple’s New MacBook Air and MacBook Pro Have New Chips, More Storage, and Higher Prices


Alongside its price-friendly iPhone 17e and M4 iPad Air yesterday, Apple just announced a few updates to the MacBook Pro, MacBook Air, and its rarely-refreshed desktop display line.

The MacBook Air has now been updated to the latest M5 chip. It’s a fairly modest upgrade, but it brings it up to speed with Apple’s latest processor that debuted in the MacBook Pro last fall. There are no other major hardware changes—it now comes with 512 GB of starting storage with “faster SSD technology”—but you can still get the Air in either a 13- or 15-inch screen size.

This laptop also features Apple’s N1 wireless chip, which includes Wi-Fi 7 and Bluetooth 6 for the latest connectivity standards. It still comes with the standard 16 GB of RAM, and sadly, there’s a $100 price bump to account for the extra storage. It now starts at $1,099 for the 13-inch model and $1,299 for the 15-inch model. Apple says you can preorder it tomorrow, with sales kicking off on March 11.

More interestingly, Apple is expanding the M5 chip series with the M5 Pro and M5 Max, now available in the 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro. Like previous generations of Apple silicon, the “Pro” and “Max” configurations add significantly improved multi-core CPU and graphics performance.

The new MacBook Air with M5.

Photograph: Courtesy of Apple

The M5 Pro and M5 Max can be configured with up to 18 CPU cores (12 performance cores and 6 “super” cores), up from 16 on the M4 Max. The M5 Pro can scale up to 20 GPU cores, while the M5 Max extends up to 40 GPU cores. Thanks to higher memory bandwidth, more efficient Neural Engine, and improved GPU architecture, Apple says the M5 Pro and M5 Max have “over 4X the peak CPU compute for AI” compared to the last generation and offer 20 percent better GPU performance.

The new MacBook Pros don’t include any other hardware changes; things have stayed largely the same since 2021—same port selection, Mini-LED display, speakers, and webcam. Even the claimed 24-hour battery life hasn’t changed from the M4 models, which came out in late 2024. Interestingly, as recently as last week, Bloomberg reported that Apple plans to launch a more significant update to the MacBook Pro later this fall, which will reportedly debut the M6 chip, an OLED touchscreen, and a thinner chassis.

Like the MacBook Air, all versions of the M5 Pro or M5 Max MacBook Pros come with twice the storage and a slightly higher starting price. Coming with 1 TB, the 14-inch M5 Pro now starts at $2,199, and the 16-inch model at $2,699. That’s $200 more than last year’s machines. Meanwhile, M5 Max prices start at $3,599.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending