Yep, that was also one of Bostrom arguments.

To properly align itself with our values, even in situations we could not even imagine ourselves, making a simulation of humans and test our avatars responses could be the only way of protecting us.

By harming « them » instead.

Free

If we had automated systems capable of even Level 1 it would completely change the nature of our economy. Forget it being a thing you buy, such a robot is replacing most manual labor.

Beyond that, tons of individual AI's housed in discrete, humanoid bodies isn't really a great design for a lot of reasons, and doesn't really reflect a realistic use of this tech in my opinion. And AI capable of your Level 2/3 tasks would already be changing the fabric of how our world works. In your hypothetical about staffing, it'd be more like having a distributed system for the building that operates all of the local units.

Otherwise, this would be something incredibly expensive. Like only bought by the wealthy and some upper-middle class. Like $50k-500k+ at the very least (just look at how much it costs to get one of those robot-arm camera operators, for instance). For everyone else it would be something they'd interact with as a service, like an app where you can hire a cleaning service, fast food workers, or the robot that picks up the trash.

I suspect even a first generation consumer humanoid robot will be "smarter" than people are assuming. It'll probably come with an associated LLM-based chat bot...and by the time humanoid robots are really available(5 - 10 years?) we'll be way beyond chatGPT.

Wouldn't a task specific robot, be confined to one form?

[deleted]

>Level 1: 999. This is a glorified vacuum cleaner. And if I don't trust it do take care of a pet I don't trust it for my good either. Honestly I expect the first batch to be better than this, closer to lvl 2, but without sex of course.

The reason why I think it won't be able to take care of kids and what not is the unknown. Cooking, cleaning, and things like this is highly predictable. Where kids and pets are unknown. Most kids and pets might be fine. But I imagine it would be easy to trick these robots.

​

See like if you take a dog out and it starts running after an animal. Can a robot handle that?

If a kid starts acting up, can the robot handle that?

If the kid has special needs, can the robot handle that? (note many human babysitters can't)

​

Same with driving. It's the unknows that is the problem. Elon Musk even talked about this. Where a robot walking around more than less needs the same tech as a self driving car. But because the speeds are greatly reduced, this means it has a lot more time to change and adapt to the unknown.

Meaning the computing power won't be enough in level 1 robots to adapt to any unknown situation.

​

And as lvl 3, I figure there will be something afterwards. But that is so far out so I am guessing.

They are right. I'm asking how much would you as a person be open to paying for whatever. I never asked what you think it is worth.

It's like someone only being able to afford $20k for a car. If no new car they want is $20k, then they aren't going to get a new car they want. What they are willing to pay for it is $20k. Not the $80k or whatever it is.

​

>OP seems to be mostly concerned about to what degree the robot can substitute for a human partner.

The biggest industry to date and for a long time is ... sex.

That industry is already preparing for it to the point they got the things to sound like they are breathing, parts needed, and so on.

And then the next biggest market is romance and dating stuff. To the point there is AI parents already out. They aren't good, but they are already making a ton of money.

So without a doubt in my mind, you will have many trying to sleep with them or mod parts onto them.

>However, clearly, OP doesn't know what they're saying when they suggest cooking, cleaning, and taking out the trash are simple tasks. You also seem to be unaware of what these things imply about the capabilities of the robot.

While complicated, it is the unknown factors. You can highly automate cooking, cleaning, and taking out the trash now. The reason why is it is highly highly highly predictable.

Watching living creatures isn't. And without a doubt in my mind little brats will try to trick and break the robot. Like can it deal with mental illness or whatever? Many human babysitters can't today.

​

Some kids might be fine, but at that stage you are trusting the kids over the robot.

>What you say makes no sense. Why would those roles disappear?

They aren't wrong

Sure at first Mc D and others will most likely agree to renting. And maybe you have your robot go to other houses to clean. BUT, this can come with it's own problems depending on the technology. Like you will have to waste actual human time for it to go to the other house, map it, and so on.

And then you will likely find over the years more and more people will end up buying their own. Plus other places like Mc D will at some point get their own robots. I imagine the only reason why you would be able to rent it out is that in between time or testing to see if it is ready. Meaning after a year, they will likely be getting their own robots anyways.

​

But again, the point of the post is how much each person is OK with paying for it. If you can afford it being $100k or so. Then cool. But unlike you as the rich person here. The real world we have to budget for these things.

[deleted]

Level 4: Cybernetic Angel

• The above but it's very obvious this one isn't human.
• Has excessively 'magical' abilities enabled by ultratech you are fundamentally incapable of comprehending or utilizing, such as on-demand spellcasting with nanotech incantations.
• Very scary and effectively an immortal demigod. A single cybernetic angel can solokill the entire planet's military if it wanted to.
• Very friendly and willing to help everyone, for some reason.
• You can't actually own it - it owns you.

Level 5: [REDACTED]

• A time traveling god that recursively accelerates itself into existence in an unbreakable loop of universal scale, meaning literally nothing can stop it - ever.

I'm going to marry a robot.
anyway, to answer the question how much I'm willing to pay, I'd say about tree fiddy.

There's too many unknowns for this to be accurate, but 'level 2' being $10-20k seems about right. It wouldn't have a lot of expensive materials though, and might not even be bipedal, but should be roughly human-like in shape to operate in our environment. Prices would have to be low enough to at least lease one like you might a car. The problem is, we probably won't see things like this for another 10 years or so, and the economic situation might change by then. Also the availability of parts and materials will change. Some prices may go down, some up, and new tech will be available. But I don't think availability will be directly linked to wealth. I think that in the future, robots will be desperately needed for a variety of reasons, and will become more of a necessity than a luxury.

Those who can afford to do so, will get the upgrades legitimately. Those who cannot will get the bootleg parts and software, just like we have done for decades in the PC space. I had plenty of functionality with a shoestring budget back in the day, and I imagine getting your 'droid hacked by the kid next door to run a variety of behaviors, will be a thing.

With the advent of open-access, AI-assisted programming, you will likely have access to a fully customizable suite of behaviors and skills with very little cost. I imagine that more regulation will be pushed by android manufacturers to control what software goes into what hardware. For safety, of course.

Why would you not just get a roommate? Way cheaper than a robot.

I think OP hasn't realized that cooking and cleaning are one of the most difficult job a robot can do, not the easiest.

You're applying costs in a real world to costs in an imaginary one, why would no other tech improve in this hypothetical universe? Anywhoodles you can see a case for governments providing older recycled units to the poor and elderly for general caretaking as a safety net. Its not unreasonable to see them, in a society that has advanced to the point they can make these robots at scale that work well, cheap and is widely available at the lower end of quality.

Rosie to robot is a valid option for me. Can she/it do stairs?

And that's good for you, but other people is willing to pay other amounts. You own purchasing power affects what you are willing to pay and it makes sense. If your think that it doesn't, well, let's just agree to desagree because that debate is out the scope of this thread and we both are pretty sure about it.

About this:

"So let me turn this around on you. I think you're confused here. Just because you're only willing to pay $1000 for a robot it doesn't mean that is what it would be priced at. "

Sorry, but I'm not confusing this. You are right, it doesn't mean that. I never said it did.

I don't really want to enter the debate of the logig in the tasks and limitations of the level 1 robot, I mostly agree with you that the op makes no sense on that...

And yes, they might rent it. But the new price would not be the previous maid price, that's the assumption that doesn't make sense. New price would be cheaper and dependant on the price (not willingness to pay) of the robot. Can you profit with that? Sure, maybe you can. But you are not getting your money back that easily. Why? Because it can be done per robots. If it was that profitable the price for the robot would go up.

And well, given the description of the robot I don't think that it would be easy to rent because it doesn't seem to be capable to move alone around the city, but that's another story....

And the first company to release one that’s not tied down to their overprice service will win. We will also have the tech to hack and improve them.

[deleted]

I think you seem to be confused. I would pay what it's worth because that is how much I think it would be worth.

Being willing to pay only $100 for a $2000 laptop because you only have $100 doesn't make sense to me.

>I agree with the limitations being arbitrary, and certainly don't make much sense to me. But I would not pay much for level one because it seems to require supervision.... If I would not trust it to take care of a pet it means that is not safe.

What's in OP's mind about why it couldn't watch a pet or a kid is unknown. OP seems to be mostly concerned about to what degree the robot can substitute for a human partner. However, clearly, OP doesn't know what they're saying when they suggest cooking, cleaning, and taking out the trash are simple tasks. You also seem to be unaware of what these things imply about the capabilities of the robot.

Besides what you say doesn't logically follow, a Roomba can't take care of a pet but it can still vacuum the floor without supervision.

>And no, you can't rent it to get the money back, that makes no sense. If the robot can fulfill those roles and is much cheaper you have to assume that those roles dessapear.

What you say makes no sense. Why would those roles disappear?

>You seem to be confusing price vs willingness to pay.

So let me turn this around on you. I think you're confused here. Just because you're only willing to pay $1000 for a robot it doesn't mean that is what it would be priced at.

It's obvious from this thread that some people wouldn't willing to pay enough to own a sophisticated robot. But perhaps they would rent it. It's like you're saying car rentals, air bnb, tool rentals, etc. are not a thing.

You could even buy a robot together with friends and family and then share it.

Depends what they can do, and what the price points are, and what the faults are.

I mean, a robot that can do all the cleaning, cooking, etc would be nice.

As an aromantic disinterested in people, sex robot would honestly be interesting too. I know, "but that's not a healthy sexual relationship" I don't really want one. I want to get off twice a week without downsides like, fucking dealing with people or intimacy, physical or emotional. I don't want to try to go out bars and pick up a 2 am, couldn't get anyone else so you'll do thinking bar chick.

Sounds weird, but a robot that could help motivate to do some basic care would be useful too - not just like a reminder from a cylinder, cause u tell myself I should do stretches and exercises still doesn't work. Not paying for a trainer, I don't care that much. A person could just fuck off.

But some part of me thinks that, I'd I had a robot walking around helping me with shit, not making any sort of emotional demands of me, gives me a be like sucking my soul out, with a finger in my ass massaging my prostate, and in that post nut clarity, grabs me by the head, looks me dead in the eyes super close and screeches in a crinoline aluminum ish voice "do some fucking sit ups once in a while you far fuck", I'd probably listen more.

I say that in a humorous way, but I'm kinda serious about the idea.

[removed]

yeah i could see that happening

I'd imagine the robot would start off empty slate. Like bare basic skills. Then you "purchase" the software for it to do other shit. IE) 25k for the starting base.

Want it to cook for you? Buy the Cook Apprentice Upgrade on the eShop for 10k. Simple software upgrade once you purchase the plan and BAM. It now knows to cook basic dishes. Advanced dishes (like chef-level skills) pay an additional 10k dollars.

Want it to know how to mow the lawn? That'll be 5k dollars. Take out the trash? 2k dollars. Do laundry? 2k dollars. You get the point.

Kind of like what Tesla is doing RIGHT NOW with full self drive tech where it's locked behind a paywall for X amt of dollars and you can always subscribe to upgrade the car.

You seem to be confusing price vs willingness to pay.

Advanced roombas cost up to 1500...yet a lot of people are not willing to pay that and buy simple 200-400 models, or don't buy one at all.

Question is not how much you think it will be worth, but how much we are willing to pay.

I agree with the limitations being arbitrary, and certainly don't make much sense to me. But I would not pay much for level one because it seems to require supervision.... If I would not trust it to take care of a pet it means that is not safe. That's a very serious limitation.

And no, you can't rent it to get the money back, that makes no sense. If the robot can fulfill those roles and is much cheaper you have to assume that those roles dessapear.