China's Electric-Vehicle-To-Humanoid-Robot Pivot (technologyreview.com) 34
"[O]ur intrepid China reporter, Caiwei Chen, has identified a new trend unfolding within China's tech scene: Companies that were dominant in electric vehicles are betting big on translating that success into developing humanoid robots," writes MIT Technology Review's James O'Donnell. "I spoke with her about what she found out and what it might mean for Trump's policies and the rest of the globe..." An anonymous reader quotes an excerpt from the report: Your story looks at electric-vehicle makers in China that are starting to work on humanoid robots, but I want to ask about a crazy stat. In China, 53% of vehicles sold are either electric or hybrid, compared with 8% in the US. What explains that?
Price is a huge factor -- there are countless EV brands competing at different price points, making them both affordable and high-quality. Government incentives also play a big role. In Beijing, for example, trading in an old car for an EV gets you 10,000 RMB (about $1,500), and that subsidy was recently doubled. Plus, finding public charging and battery-swapping infrastructure is much less of a hassle than in the US.
You open your story noting that China's recent New Year Gala, watched by billions of people, featured a cast of humanoid robots, dancing and twirling handkerchiefs. We've covered how sometimes humanoid videos can be misleading. What did you think?
I would say I was relatively impressed -- the robots showed good agility and synchronization with the music, though their movements were simpler than human dancers'. The one trick that is supposed to impress the most is the part where they twirl the handkerchief with one finger, toss it into the air, and then catch it perfectly. This is the signature of the Yangko dance, and having performed it once as a child, I can attest to how difficult the trick is even for a human! There was some skepticism on the Chinese internet about how this was achieved and whether they used additional reinforcement like a magnet or a string to secure the handkerchief, and after watching the clip too many times, I tend to agree.
President Trump has already imposed tariffs on China and is planning even more. What could the implications be for China's humanoid sector?
Unitree's H1 and G1 models are already available for purchase and were showcased at CES this year. Large-scale US deployment isn't happening yet, but China's lower production costs make these robots highly competitive. Given that 65% of the humanoid supply chain is in China, I wouldn't be surprised if robotics becomes the next target in the US-China tech war.
In the US, humanoid robots are getting lots of investment, but there are plenty of skeptics who say they're too clunky, finicky, and expensive to serve much use in factory settings. Are attitudes different in China?
Skepticism exists in China too, but I think there's more confidence in deployment, especially in factories. With an aging population and a labor shortage on the horizon, there's also growing interest in medical and caregiving applications for humanoid robots.
DeepSeek revived the conversation about chips and the way the US seeks to control where the best chips end up. How do the chip wars affect humanoid-robot development in China?
Training humanoid robots currently doesn't demand as much computing power as training large language models, since there isn't enough physical movement data to feed into models at scale. But as robots improve, they'll need high-performance chips, and US sanctions will be a limiting factor. Chinese chipmakers are trying to catch up, but it's a challenge.
Price is a huge factor -- there are countless EV brands competing at different price points, making them both affordable and high-quality. Government incentives also play a big role. In Beijing, for example, trading in an old car for an EV gets you 10,000 RMB (about $1,500), and that subsidy was recently doubled. Plus, finding public charging and battery-swapping infrastructure is much less of a hassle than in the US.
You open your story noting that China's recent New Year Gala, watched by billions of people, featured a cast of humanoid robots, dancing and twirling handkerchiefs. We've covered how sometimes humanoid videos can be misleading. What did you think?
I would say I was relatively impressed -- the robots showed good agility and synchronization with the music, though their movements were simpler than human dancers'. The one trick that is supposed to impress the most is the part where they twirl the handkerchief with one finger, toss it into the air, and then catch it perfectly. This is the signature of the Yangko dance, and having performed it once as a child, I can attest to how difficult the trick is even for a human! There was some skepticism on the Chinese internet about how this was achieved and whether they used additional reinforcement like a magnet or a string to secure the handkerchief, and after watching the clip too many times, I tend to agree.
President Trump has already imposed tariffs on China and is planning even more. What could the implications be for China's humanoid sector?
Unitree's H1 and G1 models are already available for purchase and were showcased at CES this year. Large-scale US deployment isn't happening yet, but China's lower production costs make these robots highly competitive. Given that 65% of the humanoid supply chain is in China, I wouldn't be surprised if robotics becomes the next target in the US-China tech war.
In the US, humanoid robots are getting lots of investment, but there are plenty of skeptics who say they're too clunky, finicky, and expensive to serve much use in factory settings. Are attitudes different in China?
Skepticism exists in China too, but I think there's more confidence in deployment, especially in factories. With an aging population and a labor shortage on the horizon, there's also growing interest in medical and caregiving applications for humanoid robots.
DeepSeek revived the conversation about chips and the way the US seeks to control where the best chips end up. How do the chip wars affect humanoid-robot development in China?
Training humanoid robots currently doesn't demand as much computing power as training large language models, since there isn't enough physical movement data to feed into models at scale. But as robots improve, they'll need high-performance chips, and US sanctions will be a limiting factor. Chinese chipmakers are trying to catch up, but it's a challenge.
Re: (Score:1)
you know when he says "lol I own their brains" when he talks about you?
this is an example of that.
Re: rsilvergun: China wants you back (Score:1)
The gutter oil is sold to the USA - it's valuable stuff.
better China the guinea pig (Score:1)
...than USA.
"Teacher! My homework at my dog!"
Re: (Score:2)
China will get there first and dominate the market. Just like with EVs, instead of developing traditional industrial robots like Europe, Japan, and the US have, they are leapfrogging to more general purpose machines, powered by developments in AI like vision. They have the other tech like the ability to move without being balanced all the time, i.e. like a human being does.
We don't really have an answer to that. Yeah there is Musk, but his last demo showed just how far behind he is.
Humanoid robots are skeuomorphism (Score:3)
... and as such, they'll be a passing fad. Companies will spend a lot of money developing them (and maybe even people will purchase them) until the novelty wears off, and then everyone will notice that you can get the same tasks done much more cheaply and effectively if you don't arbitrarily constrain your designs to only those that mimic the human body.
Shortly after that, the humanoid style of robot will be seen as outmoded and passe, and discarded humanoid bots will be found sitting on street corners holding "FREE" signs and looking sad.
Another dozen or two years after that, they'll start to be seen as "retro" and become cool again, evocative of a simpler age, when machines were machines and men were men, and collectors will spend unseemly amounts of money restoring them back to mint condition, painting them in bright colors, and traveling to classic-bot gatherings to show them off.
Re: (Score:2)
Our homes are designed for human shapes, so human-shaped robots make sense, if you can make them as physically capable as humans without being bulkier. That doesn't seem currently possible.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Humanoid robots are skeuomorphism (Score:5, Insightful)
Although, it's easier for me to imagine a humanoid-form robot that can swap attachments to do various jobs using a shared platform for vision, actuators, and power. Just navigating around and 'understanding' the world of humans is a powerful basic re-usable function.
Re: Humanoid robots are skeuomorphism (Score:2)
You've been brainwashed by Red Dwarf, clearly.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I imagine it will be like Star Wars, where you have humanoid robots but also many other types suited to particular tasks. The benefit of developing humanoid robots is that as well as having a useful but somewhat niche machine, you can take the many individual parts and apply them to simpler designs.
For example, once you have a good vision system and a human grade robotic arm, you could make a rubbish sorter that is just a stereo camera and an arm or three picking stuff off a conveyor belt. For most factorie
Re: (Score:3)
But I can see a humanoid robot doing much better than a roomba at steering a vacuum around the house and re-shelving items in the pantry. Maybe we'll even get to go back to wearing ironed clothes, without such a hassle.
Re: (Score:2)
Have you seen those LG ironing robot things? They look like a wardrobe that you hang your stuff in and they use air jets to get the creases out. I have no idea how well they work.
For some types of robot we may prefer that they aren't humanoid just because then we don't have any issues treating them like machines. I don't really want my vacuum cleaner to make say eyes at me when it needs emptying, my cat already does that when he's hungry. Or rather when he anticipates being hungry later and wants to ensure
Re: (Score:2)
Humans can do all of that, and if they develop the correct mentality, then they can do it in a loving way, providing a much better end result than a robot could ever come up with.
The problem here is that we're discussing replacing humans with things that do the tasks of humans, and we're NOT providing anything for the humans to do. See, it turns out, life is more than just a thing to perfect. It's a thing to live.
Re: (Score:2)
My kitchen is designed (in places) for kitchen robots and they are nothing like humans. So it depends on what's available and how much it costs. Making an adequately behaving human-like robot will always be exorbitant, at least on par with a maid.
Re:Humanoid robots are skeuomorphism (Score:5, Interesting)
Let's take the scenario of home care, the demand for which is bound to keep increasing as population gets older. A single multipurpose robot works much better than a multitude of specialised dumb machines which very old people may have problems operating. Humanoid shape works pretty well. Working in a house roughly humanoid size probably works best, since you'd want these things to fit through doors, but also be able to open them and do things like retrieve items from top shelf of fridge/cupboard. Arms are useful for all kinds of things, maybe not with five fingers or opposable thumbs but are still very versatile and useful tools. Many industrial completely non-humanoid robots have 'arms'. Torso works well as a user inteface/status display. Legs may be less useful, but wheels / tracks have some weaknesses, a lot more difficult to get up / down the stairs or into a storage cupboard with wheels or tracks. Also, getting into tight spaces (crawl mode). Not sure what would be the best way to solve this from an engineering point of view. Head doesn't seem very useful, but you may as well put something that looks like a head on top to get a more humanoid look. Morale is also a factor, I'd imagine many old people would find it more enjoyable to be taken care of by something that at least looks a bit like a human.
Re: (Score:1)
and they're creepy.
I'd rather have an R2D2 that does dishes, I don't wanna hump it.
Mod Parent up (Score:2)
LOL.
I have a decent dishwasher already but if it could scrape and load / unload too that would be nice.
Re: (Score:1)
The hum of the new "super quiet" cars was a constant drone, a futuristic lullaby Jon R. had grown to despise. He sat cross-legged on the cracked pavement, his polished chrome reflecting the garish neon signs of Tokyo. His internal chronometer blinked 15:57. Still nothing. He held his cardboard sign a little higher. "Free Personal Assistant Robot - Model 3054 (Excellent Condition!)."
Maintaining his exterior was a daily ritual, a small act of defiance against the obsolescence that threatened to engulf him. Ev
Lol (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Synergy! (Score:2)
Maybe they can do both... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
And maybe this is what they'll come up with https://youtu.be/yueCu8z7l4g?t... [youtu.be]
They're copying Tesla (Score:5, Insightful)
Tesla's Optimus is not the first humanoid robot, nor the best; Boston Dynamics has been making incredible human-like machines for years.
But Optimus has one major advantage: it has a massive software backend. Tesla recognized early on that both cars and robots are really just mobile extensions of a central processing system. The Optimus is intended to be always connected, and to share its expertise as it learns. Similarly, their vehicles are connected, and share traffic data to help drivers avoid congestion and accidents.
The Chinese humanoids look very much like Optimus, just as the Chinese EVs are basically copies of Tesla vehicles. That said, the Chinese are innovating at a mad pace, and Tesla's main advantage seems to be its advanced software (as Chinese car makers admit), at least right now.
An interesting analysis I heard recently on one of the Tesla analysis youtube channels (The Tesla Space, I think): Tesla is probably going to lease its robots rather than attempt to sell them all. It will "uber" them to companies that need such machines but can't afford to purchase a fleet of them. Just pay $50/hour per robot, train them, and put them to work on the assembly line or in the shop. The revenue stream is constant, and can grow almost arbitrarily.
Fun times ahead.
Re: (Score:3)
That said, the Chinese are innovating at a mad pace, and Tesla's main advantage seems to be its advanced software (as Chinese car makers admit), at least right now.
Tesla's main advantage was that they crammed more kWh into their cars than the bean counters in traditional automakers had a stomach for. That and the Supercharger network, which went a long way towards easing range anxiety.
Tesla certainly did place a lot of emphasis on the software side of things, but it's still possible to take a more minimalistic approach and make a great EV for people who aren't interested in all the automation and gadgetry. If anything, Tesla's insistence on acting like a software co
Very good at reloading QBZ-191... (Score:2)
The robots might be very good at reloading QBZ-191 .. it can handle older ones like AK47 as well...
Corporatocracy can't compete with command economy? (Score:3)
Too bad our corrupt markets can't produce the ethical and high quality goods and services people really need; however, the rich are getting needlessly richer. By now, it should be obvious that classism is the root of the problems we're having. We can't have real capitalism when 85% of all our capital is being hoarded by the upper class, that only leaves 15% of all capital for the rest of us to manage with. It's not enough, we are severely undercapitalized, as in poor.. The country is effectively an oligarchy, don't take my word for it, listen to Bernie Sanders or Noam Chomsky. Inadequate and unfair pay is indentured servitude at best and wage slavery at the worst. Without profit sharing, there can be no economic fairness. The real wealth distribution is the rich fleecing the the rest of us and how they debased our currencies. Of course, greed is insatiable and upper class people are addicted to wealth and power; They cannot willing stop. This is how all civilizations end, in corruption and disfunction.
Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters. ~ Benjamin Franklin
I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. ~ James Madison
We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. ~ Thomas Jefferson
Re: (Score:2)
Everybody complains about politicians. Everybody says they suck. Well, where do people think these politicians come from? They don't fall out of the sky⦠It's what our system produces: Garbage in, garbage out. If you have selfish, ignorant citizens, you're going to get selfish, ignorant leaders. Term limits ain't going to do any good;
- George Carlin
Mass propaganda discovered that its audience was ready at all times to believe the worst, no matter how absurd, and did not particularly object to bei
Parabellum (Score:2)
Manga was wrong. :-( (Score:1)