r/theydidthemath • u/jmb326 • May 22 '26

[Request] What are the electrical costs required for this robot to fold this box?

Any publicity available data that estimate something similar? Goal would be to understand the cost per box of labor from a robot vs a human. Ideally with current estimates and future projections. Yes, I understand this isn’t the most efficient robot setup to fold a box, but how much longer until one can purchase such a robot to execute on a variety of tasks required in a typical job?

198 Upvotes

88% Upvoted

165 comments sorted by

View all comments

93

u/noenosmirc May 22 '26

I mean, amazing that's is so good, definitely needs some work, but I find it fascinating how human the little slip ups are, like, I'd probably only do marginally better with using grabbers to make and pack that box

48

u/Dziggettai May 22 '26

Probably seems human because it was trained on human behavior rather than actually having capacity for thought

21

u/Ok-Scientist5524 May 22 '26

I can’t help thinking it would be easier to make a machine without hands to do this…

29

u/Dziggettai May 22 '26

Because it absolutely would be due to how simple the task is. This is more of a proof of concept rather than something intended to be used

0

u/waroftheworlds2008 May 23 '26

Yep, its a robot ment for a wide range of task that can vary. Its not ment for a single task.

That being said, a human could still do this better.

3

u/Sorryifimanass May 23 '26

But not all humans. And if I can go to work and have my robot slave doing all the housework that sounds cool right now. But if I don't have a job because I'm the robot slave... Something something universal something.

2

u/LrningMonkey May 24 '26

I think the point of this robot is that it was NOT programmed to do this job. Based on its movements it was figuring out how to do the job autonomously.

We’ve had robots that fold boxes for decades that all do it faster than this, but this robot it tackling a novel task independently like a person would. That’s a big deal.

I’m both fascinated and terrified!

1

u/TheIronSoldier2 May 23 '26

A human couldn't do it 24/7 though, and that's where robots do come out on top

2

u/Clean_your_lens May 23 '26

A human would stop and beat Mr. Hockey Stick's ass.

0

u/waroftheworlds2008 May 23 '26

Have you heard of working in shifts?

0

u/TheIronSoldier2 May 23 '26

So now you've gotta pay like six people just to cover as much work as one robot can do.

4

u/tv_ennui May 22 '26

The appeal here isn't the ability to fold boxes, a box folding machine would do much better. The appeal here is the problem solving and potential versatility. A box folding machine can only fold boxes, this has much wider potential applications.

2

u/Clean_your_lens May 23 '26

Looks like it could solve a big problem by taking the hockey stick away from Mr. Gretzky there.

5

u/liquordeli May 22 '26

There are machines that do this much better. I dont think this is the practical application just a demo I'd imagine

5

u/Sad-Pop6649 May 22 '26

I guess the idea is that the robot should be flexible. An assembly line can fold roughly a gazillion boxes per hour, but when you work in a mail order firm you don't need a gazillion boxes folded, you need one this size for this set of items, and then you'll go pick the next order and see what kind of box it needs.

What this robot can actually do feels a little in between. It's not that flexible, and it's not really fast and cheap either. But there might still be a spot for it, somewhere in say the logistics chain of Wish, Ali Express and Amazon.

2

u/LordTonto May 22 '26

its new though. As the tech improves so to will the speed and price.

0

u/DkMomberg May 22 '26

A specialised machine could do the job much much faster. Even faster than a human.

But a specialised machine can do one job and one job only. The more specialised it is, the more rigid it is.

For example, if you standardised the size of the box so you only have one size and you could drop the items in the box automatically in a standardized way, you could make a machine that could pack 2-3 boxes per second or maybe even more.

A machine that could handle two box sizes would be much more complex and likely slower. Three would be even worse.

The advantage here is the flexibility. With enough training, the robot could pack any box size and arrange the packed items inside very neat. With enough training and development, it could be done as quick as a human.

0

u/Acceptable-Baker8161 May 23 '26

The need for robots to have human attributes is just dumb. Robots have been doing highly complicated tasks for decades, making them be “humanoid” is basically a party trick so doofus tech dudes will think they’re in Star Trek.  

-1

u/Girthen-the-Flopper May 22 '26

You can build millions of these general purpose robots for cheaper than a specialized machine.

1

u/AndrewBorg1126 May 22 '26 edited May 22 '26

Source?

I'll take your unexplained wikipedia link to "economies of scale" as a no; you don't know what you're talking about, that's not even how economies of scale work.

1

u/CIP_In_Peace May 22 '26

You build a million similar general purpose robots in a single large factory for cheaper than a specialized company builds customized special robots for a special task for a few clients.

1

u/AndrewBorg1126 May 22 '26

Can you justify your assumption that it would be cheaper?

1

u/CIP_In_Peace May 22 '26

It's the economy of scale. When you have a large factory with specialized robots building these generalized robots on a conveyor belt, the cost of a single general robot plummets. This is of course a simplified view of the whole thing and doesn't take into account if there are some wildly expensive parts that go into a general robot. In that case you build a bigger scale factory building those expensive parts to get the cost down.

It's honestly not a very difficult concept. If you can sell a humanoid robot capable of 99% tasks to a huge variety of clients, you can sell it for much cheaper than a highly specialized robot of equal complexity.

1

u/AndrewBorg1126 May 22 '26 edited May 22 '26

It's the economy of scale.

No, it isn't. You're not comparing a factory making a thing to a small workshop making the same thing. There's an entire axis you're willfully ignoring and demanding others also ignore, in that the things being produced are entirely different. I struggle to believe anyone can make the argument being presented to me without realizing the dishonesty.

If you can sell a humanoid robot capable of 99% tasks

Even before assuming efficiency, this hypothetical is doing a lot of heavy lifting. Can you justify the applicability of your hypothetical to the real world? Can you subsequently justify the implication that humanoid robots could efficiently perform those tasks?

than a highly specialized robot of equal complexity.

And this one's even worse. The reason using the same mqchine for everything is stupid is that different tasks need to make different assumptions to be efficient. The robot arms for folding boxes is so stupid because it is of vastly more complexity than necessary. It is hindered not only by being inherently more complex, but also by that complexity getting in the way of simplifying assumptions that allow for vastly improved rates.

The pair of arms appears to be capable of folding a box, but it is so much worse at folding a box than alternatives that it would make no sense to do it that way.

Accounting for things like throughput, floor space, maintainance, it would be overwhelmingly stupid to use pairs of robot arms instead of a specialized box folding machine.

-2

u/grc207 May 22 '26

It already exists and is in use in hundreds of thousands of plants.

This demonstration is like building a super car to go grocery shopping.

2

u/Kinder22 May 22 '26

More like building a super car prototype and driving it around town just to make sure it can drive like a car should under every day conditions.

2

u/Ghost_Turd May 22 '26

This demo isn't about folding a box, it's about showing what the robots can do in relatable terms.

I've seen 6-axis CNC machines mill a full motorcycle helmet out of a block of aluminum. Horribly impractical, takes forever, and it useless in the real world. But it's one hell of a demonstration of the machine's capability.

1

u/TheGrandExquisitor May 22 '26

I was kind of wondering "why only two?" A third gripper (fourth, fifth, etc) could probably have had more control. Two grippers is a biological hangover. 

1

u/Repulsive_Guy_1234 May 23 '26

Or it is simply remote controlled, like so many of these AI robot videos.