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

What It’s Like to Have a Brain Implant for 5 Years

Published

on

What It’s Like to Have a Brain Implant for 5 Years


Initially, Gorham used his brain-computer interface for single clicks, Oxley says. Then he moved on to multi-clicks and eventually sliding control, which is akin to turning up a volume knob. Now he can move a computer cursor, an example of 2D control—horizontal and vertical movements within a two-dimensional plane.

Over the years, Gorham has gotten to try out different devices using his implant. Zafar Faraz, a field clinical engineer for Synchron, says Gorham directly contributed to the development of Switch Control, a new accessibility feature Apple announced last year that allows brain-computer interface users the ability to control iPhones, iPads, and the Vision Pro with their thoughts.

In a video demonstration shown at an Nvidia conference last year in San Jose, California, Gorham demonstrates using his implant to play music from a smart speaker, turn on a fan, adjust his lights, activate an automatic pet feeder, and run a robotic vacuum in his home in Melbourne, Australia.

“Rodney has been pushing the boundaries of what is possible,” Faraz says.

As a field clinical engineer, Faraz visits Gorham in his home twice a week to lead sessions on his brain-computer interface. It’s Faraz’s job to monitor the performance of the device, troubleshoot problems, and also learn the range of things that Gorham can and can’t do with it. Synchron relies on this data to improve the reliability and user-friendliness of its system.

In the years he’s been working with Gorham, the two have done a lot of experimenting to see what’s possible with the implant. Once, Faraz says, he had Gorham using two iPads side by side, switching between playing a game on one and listening to music on the other. Another time, Gorham played a computer game in which he had to grab blocks on a shelf. The game was tied to an actual robotic arm at the University of Melbourne, about six miles from Gorham’s home, that remotely moved real blocks in a lab.

Gorham, who was an IBM software salesman before he was diagnosed with ALS in 2016, has relished being such a key part of the development of the technology, his wife Caroline says.

“It fits Rodney’s set of life skills,” she says. “He spent 30 years in IT, talking to customers, finding out what they needed from their software, and then going back to the techos to actually develop what the customer needed. Now it’s sort of flipped around the other way.” After a session with Faraz, Gorham will often be smiling ear to ear.

Through field visits, the Synchron team realized it needed to change the setup of its system. Currently, a wire cable with a paddle on one end needs to sit on top of the user’s chest. The paddle collects the brain signals that are beamed through the chest and transmits them via the wire to an external unit that translates those signals into commands. In its second generation system, Synchron is removing that wire.

“If you have a wearable component where there’s a delicate communication layer, we learned that that’s a problem,” Oxley says. “With a paralyzed population, you have to depend on someone to come and modify the wearable components and make sure the link is working. That was a huge learning piece for us.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Barkbox Offers: Themed Dog Toys, All-Natural Treats, and Subscription Deals

Published

on

Barkbox Offers: Themed Dog Toys, All-Natural Treats, and Subscription Deals


As my fellow pet parents will know, it’s amazing how quickly even the tiniest of dogs can demolish their toys and treat stash. We love and spoil them nonetheless. When you subscribe to BarkBox a fresh batch of cleverly themed treats and toys arrives at your doorstep. The costs of pet ownership can stack up quickly, especially if you’re buying your pooch a random gift box that goes well beyond the essentials. That’s why we have Barkbox promo codes and discount options ready to go for you.

Barkbox Promo: Enjoy a Free Toy for a Year at Barkbox

When your monthly Barkbox arrives, it’s like Christmas morning for your dogs. I watch as my two dogs, Rosi and Randy, shake their little Chihuahua mix bodies with barely restrained excitement. They’re never gentle on their toys but the stimulation that comes from textures and chewing is good for their little brains. With Barkbox you get a steady supply of two unique toys and two bags of all-natural treats every month. If you want to see how your dogs react, this Barkbox coupon is good for new Barkbox subscription customers and adds an additional toy in your box every month for a year.

Save 50% on Your First Barkbox Food Subscription With a Barkbox Coupon Code

Another reason why Barkbox is the best dog subscription box is how easy the company makes it to keep your pantry stocked with your dog’s food. Use this Barkbox coupon to save 50% off your first Barkbox food subscription, so you won’t have to end up running out to the grocery store in the middle of the night when your scooper scrapes across the bottom of an empty kibble bin.

Fly Travel Stress-Free With Your Dog and Get $300 Off BARK Air Flights

If you live in a Barkbox flight hub destination, please know I am insanely jealous of you. It’s no secret that flying is stressful and can be very dangerous for pets, especially if they have to ride in a cargo hold. Barkbox makes them the VIP with BARK Air, letting them ride in the cabin with you and get doted on, so things are a lot less scary. This is another perk of having a BarkBox subscription, with the opportunity to save $300 off BARK Air Flights.

Support Your Dog’s Dental Health and Get $10 Off With a Barkbox Coupon

Dental health is crucial for dogs, as it can prevent disease not just in their mouths, but their vital organs. Don’t forget to schedule your yearly cleaning with your vet, but in the meantime, use this BarkBox discount code to get $10 off a special BarkBox Dental kit.

Get an Extra Premium Toy in Every BarkBox With the Extra Toy Club

For having such tiny mouths, my dogs can gnaw through toys with surprising speed. If you’re also buried in a pile of shredded fluff and squeakers from disemboweled toys, the Extra Toy Club can help. This subscription includes dog toys for aggressive chewers of all ages, breeds, and sizes, offering extra durable toys meant to last longer. So far, so good at my house. To upgrade to this subscription box, it’s an extra $9 per month.

Get Exclusive BarkBox Discounts: Join the Email List

If you assume that the punchy branding and witty lingo extend to Barkbox’s email subscribers and not just the box subscription, you’d be correct. As a bonus, you can get exclusive BarkBox discount codes when you sign up to receive these emails. Who also doesn’t love a furry face and reminder of their pet in between work subject lines and bill payment reminders, too?



Source link

Continue Reading

Tech

Transnational AI regulation needed to protect human rights in the UK | Computer Weekly

Published

on

Transnational AI regulation needed to protect human rights in the UK | Computer Weekly


The transnational nature of artificial intelligence (AI) means international regulation is essential to tackle the safety issues associated with advanced AI, according to tech chiefs. 

In the final evidence session of the Joint Committee on Human Rights inquiry into human rights and the regulation of AI on 25 February, MPs and Lords pressed the AI minister and senior executives from Meta and Microsoft on the adequacy of current safeguards in protecting fundamental rights.

Lawmakers questioned the panel on misinformation, accountability, child safety, existential risk and Britain’s AI sovereignty, probing whether current safeguards are strong enough to protect democratic rights and freedoms as AI systems become embedded across society.

The session came just weeks after the committee warned that the UK’s existing regulatory framework is struggling to keep pace with AI harms – with several regulators telling MPs that a lack of resources, rather than statutory powers, is the greatest hurdle to effective oversight.

Ginny Badanes, general manager of tech for society at Microsoft, and Rob Sherman, deputy chief privacy officer of policy at Meta, welcomed greater harmonisation in regulatory standards at a global level. 

Speaking on AI governance, Badanes told MPs the current issue is not a lack of activity, but the bigger challenge of fragmentation. 

“I worry at times when we have this variety of approaches that we’re not actually addressing the broader safety or human rights risks that are at the centre of what everyone is trying collectively to solve,” she said.

Transnational by design

Badanes added that “everything about advanced AI is transnational by design – the systems are developed, tested and deployed in a variety of places across borders and within multiple supply chains, and then integrated into products that are used at a global scale”.

She argued that an alignment in international standards could lead to a base layer of agreement, “creating a strong place to get out of fragmented models”. 

Sherman mirrored this, noting that Meta operates in most countries worldwide, and that its human rights policy applies globally.

He added that Meta does not build separate AI models for different countries, despite the regional variation in AI governance. 

Asked whether the UK’s AI Opportunities Action Plan strikes the right balance between innovation and human rights, both companies were broadly supportive.

Badanes said the UK had made “a sensible start”, building on its “strong foundation of human rights” law and taking a risk-based approach.

Public trust, she argued, is “absolutely critical” to AI adoption. “People will not embrace and use a technology that they do not trust,” said Badanes, adding that strong but proportionate regulation would help secure that trust.

Sherman described the UK’s strategy as “a really thoughtful and sensible approach”, and, in some respects, “a global model”. He also praised the UK’s AI Security Institute as “a global thought leader” in technical AI governance.

Misinformation and democracy

The committee asked if Meta was doing enough to challenge the use of AI by foreign actors on social media, raising concerns about how AI and social media are being used to undermine democratic rights and freedoms.

The committee noted that anonymous posting is increasingly the main way people post on Facebook groups.

Sherman stressed that Facebook is a “real identity platform”, meaning identity is verified using government-issued photo IDs, and that these groups were intended to allow people to share sensitive information without attaching their identity to it. Without accounting for the platform’s own role in spreading misinformation, he said, “I would encourage people to be thoughtful about the sources of the information that they consume”.

However, Sherman said the company would “certainly never suggest that the work to do that is done”, noting that adversaries “continue to evolve their tactics” and “behave adversarially”.

On the reliability of large language models, executives admitted AI systems can generate false information – so-called “hallucinations”. While models are “designed to tell you the truth”, Sherman conceded they are not 100% accurate.

Badanes added: “I think it’s incredibly difficult to ask a large language model to consistently provide you with the truth, in part because of the inherent flaws of the way the systems are designed. I do expect they will continue to get better, but also because truth is at times subjective, and it is a challenging environment to guarantee or ensure anything.”

The committee asked about situations when chatbots provide incorrect or manipulative outputs. Badanes noted the importance of public trust in AI, saying it is lost when the system does not answer a question.

The witnesses said Facebook and Microsoft are working to improve factual alignment, provide citations and, in some cases, indicate levels of confidence in responses. They also emphasised the importance of AI literacy and managing expectations of what services chatbots should provide.

The most difficult questions centred on accountability. When asked who should be responsible if someone suffers harm after relying on incorrect or manipulative AI outputs, such as bad legal advice or encouragement of self-harm, executives stopped short of proposing a specific legal framework.

Microsoft’s Badanes said accountability should attach “where there’s meaningful control”, suggesting responsibility may vary depending on whether harm stems from the model itself, its deployment, or a malicious user. Meta’s Sherman agreed courts would likely need to examine “multiple players” in any given case.

Parental controls

Sherman highlighted that age verification often varies app to app, and highlighted that standardised, platform-level verification is not in the current ecosystem, but would be valuable.

Badanes emphasised the variation in experiences of AI across platforms. “A chatbox where a child can form relationships is going to be a higher-risk scenario than potentially a tutoring app,” she said, encouraging a risk-based approach to AI governance rather than attempting to apply a single age-based threshold across AI tools.

“It’s not just about restricting access, we also need to build these age-appropriate designs and safety guardrails – it’s about adding clear boundaries into the system from the very beginning,” said Badanes.

Existential risks from AI 

Asked if individuals should be able to opt out of AI entirely, Sherman said AI has been embedded in services such as Facebook and Instagram “since the beginning”, from news feed ranking to spam filtering. “I don’t think that opting out of AI as a technology is probably realistic,” he said, warning against the idea that it would be possible to “wall off AI from the rest of technology”.

Sherman and Badanes pushed back against binary artificial general intelligence narratives, such as the 2023 extinction-risk statement from the Centre for AI Safety, signed by many leaders in the tech industry, that warned of possible risks of extinction from AI.

Sherman said: “I think the reality is maybe a little bit less exciting and a little bit more mundane, which is that the technology will continue to improve iteratively. I don’t think we’re in a situation where we’re going to wake up one day, and the world is vastly different.”

Badanes described existential harm as “low-probability, high-impact”, stressing that companies are focused on managing both long-term and immediate dangers. “We have to address the risks in the here and now,” said Sherman, while continuing to plan for more extreme scenarios.

Both firms pointed to internal governance structures, including red-teaming exercises, external expert consultation and frontier risk frameworks. Sherman told MPs that through the Frontier programme, Meta evaluates models for “chemical, biological, cyber security and autonomy risks” before and after deployment. 

They also emphasised the importance of collaboration with governments, noting that states hold intelligence and national security information unavailable to the private sector.

Speaking to the committee in a separate session, AI minister Kanishka Narayan praised the UK’s AI Security Institute, saying it provides “unparalleled pre-deployment access” to advanced models and plays a key role in developing international evaluation standards.

Badanes likened AI to nuclear regulation. “There are a lot of really complicated challenges that we as a big, large society, have been able to resolve that have had similar roots,” she said.

However, MPs raised concerns about AI researchers who have left major companies over safety disagreements. Asked whether voluntary corporate safeguards were sufficient, Sherman responded that firms have “clear internal reporting mechanisms” and “encourage dissent”, but stopped short of calling for binding global treaties.

Industry leaders urged policymakers to prioritise “interoperable, risk-based global standards” for the most capable systems and invest in content provenance tools, including watermarking, to counter misinformation.

Narayan noted that compared with the first AI summit in Bletchley Park, the India AI Impact Summit was much more focused on the day-to-day experience of people rather than the more abstract, long-term questions of how AI might fundamentally transform the economy, or the more long-term risks it may pose.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending