←back to thread

Nvidia won, we all lost

(blog.sebin-nyshkim.net)
977 points todsacerdoti | 3 comments | 04 Jul 25 21:58 UTC | HN request time: 0.735s | source
Show context
ionwake ◴[04 Jul 25 22:56 UTC] No.44468630[source]▶
I don’t want to jump on nvidia but I found it super weird when they clearly remote controlled a Disney bot onto the stage and claimed it was all using real time AI which was clearly impossible due to no latency and weirdly the bot verifying correct stage position in relation to the presenter. It was obviously the Disney bot just being controlled by someone off stage.

I found it super alarming because why would they fake something on stage to the extent of just lying.i know Steve jobs had backup phones but jsut claiming a robot is autonomous when it isn’t I just feel it was scammy.

It reminded me of when Tesla had remote controlled Optimus bots. I mean I think that’s awesome like super cool but clearly the users thought the robots were autonomous during that dinner party.

I have no idea why I seem to be the only person bothered by “stage lies” to this level. Tbh even the Tesla bots weren’t claimed to be autonomous so actually I should never have mentioned them but it explains the “not real” vibe.

Not meaning to disparage just explaining my perception as a European maybe it’s just me though!

EDIT > Im kinda suprised by the weak arguments in the replies, I love both companies, I am just offering POSITIVE feedback, that its important ( in my eyes ) to be careful not to pretend in certain specific ways or it makes the viewer question the foundation ( which we all know is SOLID and good ).

EDIT 2 >There actually is a good rebuttal in the replies, although apparently I have "reading comprehension skill deficiencies" its just my pov that they were insinuating the robot was aware of its surroundings, which is fair enough.

replies(7): >>44468687 #>>44468689 #>>44468696 #>>44468755 #>>44468868 #>>44469457 #>>44472494 #
AtariATMHacker[dead post] ◴[04 Jul 25 23:16 UTC] No.44468755[source]▶
[dead]
timschmidt ◴[04 Jul 25 23:53 UTC] No.44468975[source]▶
It seems to me like both cases raised by OP - the Disney droids and Optimus - are cases of people making assumptions and then getting upset that their assumptions were wrong and making accusations.

Neither company was very forthcoming about the robots being piloted, but neither seems to be denying it either. And both seem to use RL / ML techniques to maintain balance, locomotion, etc. Not unlike Boston Dynamics' bots, which are also very carefully orchestrated by humans in multiple ways.

Haters gonna hate (downvotes just prove it - ha!)

replies(2): >>44469065 #>>44469112 #
1. ionwake ◴[05 Jul 25 00:10 UTC] No.44469065[source]▶
If you look at the video he says " this is real time simulation .. can you believe it" basically : https://www.youtube.com/shorts/jD5y1eQ3Y_o

Yet he lists all the RL stuff that we know is used in the robot, he isnt being silent and saying " this robot is aided by AI" , or better yet, not commenting on the specifics, ( which would have been totally ok ), instead he is saying " This is real life simulation", which it isnt.

EDIT > apparently I am wrong - thank you for the correction everyone!

replies(1): >>44469090 #
2. timschmidt ◴[05 Jul 25 00:15 UTC] No.44469090[source]▶
I have written motion control firmwares for 20+ years, and "this is real time simulation" has very domain-specific meaning to me. "Real time" means the code is responding to events as they happen, like with interrupts, and not via preemptible processing which could get out of sync with events. "simulation" is used by most control systems from simple PID loops to advanced balancing and motion planning.

It is clearly - to me at least - doing both of those things.

I think you're reading things into what he said that aren't there.

replies(1): >>44469115 #
3. ionwake ◴[05 Jul 25 00:22 UTC] No.44469115[source]▶
ok thanks