• ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Seems like a tripod robot would offer little benefit over a bipedal one while having more parts (costing more).

    • wahming@monyet.cc
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      A total inability to fall over or navigate any terrain regardless of roughness isn’t a benefit? Increased manipulators would also increase productivity / capability, probably much more than making up for increased cost.

      Your argument is essentially that the human form is the best possible one imaginable, which I find highly doubtful.

      • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        My argument is that humans have built our cities to be navigated best by the human form, so that in that environment it is the best form. In most terrains a quadruped form is better.

        • wahming@monyet.cc
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Put it this way - does it seem like cats and dogs have any trouble navigating our environment?

            • wahming@monyet.cc
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Current prices are meaningless. It’s not mass production or retail pricing. I doubt the components actually cost more than a few hundred dollars. It’s an extremely limited niche market and prices are based on what will get them the most return on their R&D budget, not anything resembling production cost.