I want AI to do my laundry ...
I want AI to do my laundry ...
I feel like you are severely overestimating the level of computation required for a dryer and dishwasher
So why is there no machine which removes the dirty dishes from the table and kitchen and puts them away where they belong after the dishwasher is done? Same with the loundry. It seems the last 5 meters from the dryer to the wardrobe need emense computational power, otherwise we would have those machines already.
Is moving the dishes from the table to the dishwasher really stopping you from making art?
Why did you repost this? https://lemmy.world/post/16108828
I went there, I looked around and didn't find it that it was posted already and then decided to post it as the first person. Does it count?
If you were no aware of this post that's OK. But it's just a repost, no interest.
I want a talking pelican to do my laundry.
"It's a living!"
Prolly means its getting paid.
Earliest known subscription model
This kind of highlights how AI isn't the issue. The reason there's not a robot that does your laundry and dishes is because the margin for such a robot wouldn't make anyone insanely rich, just well off. Especially in say the consumer market. Getting rid of say 50% of your employees and making the other 50% "Prompt Engineers" without any pay increase provides an instant two fold increase in profit.
The issue is how much money can a particular tool make someone. Before Photoshop came around, the larger magazines used to have at least three dozen airbrush and cover artist on staff, not to mention the photographers, film processors, etc... Today, with Photoshop, those six to seven dozen jobs have been consolidated into maybe a dozen folks. Some head of the magazine got to keep churning out stories with 80% less staff. It wasn't that Photoshop is good or bad, it was that someone saw dollar signs and ran with it.
Companies pay for technology with the expectation of paying it off down the road. So if 10 licenses of Photoshop cost $X, but they save Y number of employees * $r/yr rate of pay, then the licenses pay for themselves down the road. Consumer markets aren't like that. If a consumer has $X and something costs more than that money on-hand, there's just not a "pay for it down the road" for consumers. At least one that doesn't come with a lot of headache and trouble down the road as well.
The thing is, companies are going to use any excuse they can to fire people, especially senior staff people. If the technology doesn't work, oh well, they hire younger and newer folks back at greatly reduced pay compared to the folks who got laid off. AI is just the most recent MacGuffin in that shuffle and they're willing to put ludicrous amounts of money into that thing because "down the road, one way or another, it'll save us cash". That's why there's no dish washing or laundry robot, there's no serious money to be made from it. But over-hyped AI that could provide the same kind of massive layoff benefit that say Photoshop or CGI provided, these C-Staff folks can not shovel enough money into that fire.
.... Washing machine?
Does your washing machine get the longry from the floor and afterwards irons it, folds it and puts it away into the wardrobe?
No - but both that and my dishwasher have been using machine learning for years to decide how much water and how long to work the different parts of their programmes