Tech
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 humanoid robots 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 reinforcement learning 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.
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.
Tech
Two Thinking Machines Lab Cofounders Are Leaving to Rejoin OpenAI
Thinking Machines cofounders Barret Zoph and Luke Metz are leaving the fledgling AI lab and rejoining OpenAI, the ChatGPT-maker announced on Thursday. OpenAI’s CEO of applications, Fidji Simo, shared the news in a memo to staff Thursday afternoon.
The news was first reported on X by technology reporter Kylie Robison, who wrote that Zoph was fired for “unethical conduct.”
A source close to Thinking Machines said that Zoph had shared confidential company information with competitors. WIRED was unable to verify this information with Zoph, who did not immediately respond to WIRED’s request for comment.
Zoph told Thinking Machines CEO Mira Murati on Monday he was considering leaving, then was fired today, according to the memo from Simo. She goes on to write that OpenAI doesn’t share the same concerns about Zoph as Murati.
The personnel shake-up is a major win for OpenAI, which recently lost its VP of research, Jerry Tworek.
Another Thinking Machines Lab staffer, Sam Schoenholz, is also rejoining OpenAI, the source said.
Zoph and Metz left OpenAI in late 2024 to start Thinking Machines with Murati, who had been the ChatGPT-maker’s chief technology officer.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Tech
Tech Workers Are Condemning ICE Even as Their CEOs Stay Quiet
Since Donald Trump returned to the White House last January, the biggest names in tech have mostly fallen in line with the new regime, attending dinners with officials, heaping praise upon the administration, presenting the president with lavish gifts, and pleading for Trump’s permission to sell their products to China. It’s been mostly business as usual for Silicon Valley over the past year, even as the administration ignored a wide range of constitutional norms and attempted to slap arbitrary fees on everything from chip exports to worker visas for high-skilled immigrants employed by tech firms.
But after an ICE agent shot and killed an unarmed US citizen, Renee Nicole Good, in broad daylight in Minneapolis last week, a number of tech leaders have begun publicly speaking out about the Trump administration’s tactics. This includes prominent researchers at Google and Anthropic, who have denounced the killing as calloused and immoral. The most wealthy and powerful tech CEOs are still staying silent as ICE floods America’s streets, but now some researchers and engineers working for them have chosen to break rank.
More than 150 tech workers have so far signed a petition asking for their company CEOs to call the White House, demand that ICE leave US cities, and speak out publicly against the agency’s recent violence. Anne Diemer, a human resources consultant and former Stripe employee who organized the petition, says that workers at Meta, Google, Amazon, OpenAI, TikTok, Spotify, Salesforce, Linkedin, and Rippling are among those who have signed. The group plans to make the list public once they reach 200 signatories.
“I think so many tech folks have felt like they can’t speak up,” Diemer told WIRED. “I want tech leaders to call the country’s leaders and condemn ICE’s actions, but even if this helps people find their people and take a small part in fighting fascism, then that’s cool, too.”
Nikhil Thorat, an engineer at Anthropic, said in a lengthy post on X that Good’s killing had “stirred something” in him. “A mother was gunned down in the street by ICE, and the government doesn’t even have the decency to perform a scripted condolence,” he wrote. Thorat added that the moral foundation of modern society is “infected, and is festering,” and the country is living through a “cosplay” of Nazi Germany, a time when people also stayed silent out of fear.
Jonathan Frankle, chief AI scientist at Databricks, added a “+1” to Thorat’s post. Shrisha Radhakrishna, chief technology and chief product officer of real estate platform Opendoor, replied that what happened to Good is “not normal. It’s immoral. The speed at which the administration is moving to dehumanize a mother is terrifying.” Other users who identified themselves as employees at OpenAI and Anthropic also responded in support of Thorat.
Shortly after Good was shot, Jeff Dean, an early Google employee and University of Minnesota graduate who is now the chief scientist at Google DeepMind and Google Research, began re-sharing posts with his 400,000 X followers criticizing the Trump administration’s immigration tactics, including one outlining circumstances in which deadly force isn’t justified for police officers interacting with moving vehicles.
He then weighed in himself. “This is completely not okay, and we can’t become numb to repeated instances of illegal and unconstitutional action by government agencies,” Dean wrote in an X post on January 10. “The recent days have been horrific.” He linked to a video of a teenager—identified as a US citizen—being violently arrested at a Target in Richfield, Minnesota.
In response to US Vice President JD Vance’s assertion on X that Good was trying to run over the ICE agent with her vehicle, Aaron Levie, the CEO of the cloud storage company Box, replied, “Why is he shooting after he’s fully out of harm’s way (2nd and 3rd shot)? Why doesn’t he just move away from the vehicle instead of standing in front of it?” He added a screenshot of a Justice Department webpage outlining best practices for law enforcement officers interacting with suspects in moving vehicles.
Tech
A Brain Mechanism Explains Why People Leave Certain Tasks for Later
How does procrastination arise? The reason you decide to postpone household chores and spend your time browsing social media could be explained by the workings of a brain circuit. Recent research has identified a neural connection responsible for delaying the start of activities associated with unpleasant experiences, even when these activities offer a clear reward.
The study, led by Ken-ichi Amemori, a neuroscientist at Kyoto University, aimed to analyze the brain mechanisms that reduce motivation to act when a task involves stress, punishment, or discomfort. To do this, the researchers designed an experiment with monkeys, a widely used model for understanding decisionmaking and motivation processes in the brain.
The scientists worked with two macaques that were trained to perform various decisionmaking tasks. In the first phase of the experiment, after a period of water restriction, the animals could activate one of two levers that released different amounts of liquid; one option offered a smaller reward and the other a larger one. This exercise allowed them to evaluate how the value of the reward influences the willingness to perform an action.
In a later stage, the experimental design incorporated an unpleasant element. The monkeys were given the choice of drinking a moderate amount of water without negative consequences or drinking a larger amount on the condition of receiving a direct blast of air in the face. Although the reward was greater in the second option, it involved an uncomfortable experience.
As the researchers anticipated, the macaques’ motivation to complete the task and access the water decreased considerably when the aversive stimulus was introduced. This behavior allowed them to identify a brain circuit that acts as a brake on motivation in the face of anticipated adverse situations. In particular, the connection between the ventral striatum and the ventral pallidum, two structures located in the basal ganglia of the brain, known for their role in regulating pleasure, motivation, and reward systems, was observed to be involved.
The neural analysis revealed that when the brain anticipates an unpleasant event or potential punishment, the ventral striatum is activated and sends an inhibitory signal to the ventral pallidum, which is normally responsible for driving the intention to perform an action. In other words, this communication reduces the impulse to act when the task is associated with a negative experience.
The Brain Connection Behind Procrastination
To investigate the specific role of this connection, as described in the study published in the journal Current Biology, researchers used a chemogenetic technique that, through the administration of a specialized drug, temporarily disrupted communication between the two brain regions. By doing so, the monkeys regained the motivation to initiate tasks, even in those tests that involved blowing air.
Notably, the inhibitory substance produced no change in trials where reward was not accompanied by punishment. This result suggests that the EV-PV circuit does not regulate motivation in a general way, but rather is specifically activated to suppress it when there is an expectation of discomfort. In this sense, apathy toward unpleasant tasks appears to develop gradually as communication between these two regions intensifies.
Beyond explaining why people tend to unconsciously resist starting household chores or uncomfortable obligations, the findings have relevant implications for understanding disorders such as depression or schizophrenia, in which patients often experience a significant loss of the drive to act.
However, Amemori emphasizes that this circuit serves an essential protective function. “Overworking is very dangerous. This circuit protects us from burnout,” he said in comments reported by Nature. Therefore, he cautions that any attempt to externally modify this neural mechanism must be approached with care, as further research is needed to avoid interfering with the brain’s natural protective processes.
This story originally appeared in WIRED en Español and has been translated from Spanish.
-
Politics1 week agoUK says provided assistance in US-led tanker seizure
-
Entertainment1 week agoDoes new US food pyramid put too much steak on your plate?
-
Entertainment1 week agoWhy did Nick Reiner’s lawyer Alan Jackson withdraw from case?
-
Business1 week agoTrump moves to ban home purchases by institutional investors
-
Sports4 days agoClock is ticking for Frank at Spurs, with dwindling evidence he deserves extra time
-
Sports1 week agoPGA of America CEO steps down after one year to take care of mother and mother-in-law
-
Business1 week agoBulls dominate as KSE-100 breaks past 186,000 mark – SUCH TV
-
Business1 week agoGold prices declined in the local market – SUCH TV
