Those tasks have standards to conform to and real consequences if they fuck it up so ai cant do it.

Those robots are expensive! They're not gonna risk something worth so much on anything dangerous - let the worthless humans do that shit!

Robots do, there is anlot of automation now in big mines, Copper be extracted in El Teniente mine in chile, in the middle of the andes and the "miners" can sit comfortably in a control room in the city of rancagua with a cup of coffee.

EDT: Altough part of the mine is still manned.

They... are?

But…robots are doing all three of those things?

Robots are doing exactly all the things described because they are hazardous to humans.

LLMs are not robots.

Why don't robots do something useful, like transporting things, washing the dishes or my clothes!!1!

empties the dishwasher and hops in a car

Real answer?

People who have access to the tools use it to do tasks they want to avoid. Sally from the civil team doesn't work in mines or under the ocean, but she does spend way too much time on PowerPoint slides and emails she doesn't actually care about. So she has Claude handle it so she can focus on her other work.

We have robots doing the dangerous jobs in this meme. Its just they don't do 100% of the work. They also don't do 100% of knowledge work either to this day. If you have an AI make you a power point and then you don't edit it and do quality assurance on it you are going to have one jank ass powerpoint.

Even if the crazy miracles its doing with decomp & recomp work on video games lately: that still requires a ton of human involvement.

They might eventually be able to do 100% of physical labor though. And 100% of knowledge work. They just are not there yet. The former requires use to have enough physical materials though.

You get to replace a lot more cost when you swap engineers and artists for AI slop machines than you do when you swap manual labor for actual mechanical robots.

The people with the money to make the bots know this too.

Physical AI isn't that good yet. It's getting better, but we are still at the beginning. AI hasn't been out of the AI winter for long; these things take time.

That being said, "dumb" robots already do a lot, and that will probably expand too with new AI support.

Allegedly the reason can be found in the published Epstein files. But the people told me never pointed me to an exact portion, though it was something in the lines of:

Can you operate these image recognition and similar systems in reverse? That could be used for art generation, and we could dethrone the left from its ivory tower.

Are you nuts, those robots are expensive. We don't want to get them dirty.

When work is done by the underclass, human life is cheaper than maintaining complex automation.

turns out, a lot of manual labour tasks are too complex to automate easily. even if the work is repetitive and seems like it would be simple, there's a lot of things that you can't just stick a robot into and have it work

computer tasks, on the other hand.. it's a lot easier, and there's much better training data, and the stakes are theoretically (and often in practice) lower.

now, as for WHY we're not globally prioritizing automating the dangerous stuff completely, that'd be because money, I imagine

edit: I'm referring to semi-autonomous robots here, not general automation. automation in general is still going strong, as companies love to spend a few millions dollars to automate something so they save on many more millions of labour costs in the future. customers will buy a custom machine from us for a couple million and operator costs will halve while production doubles. the remaining half of the operator costs I mentioned to towards maintenance staff, which is generally a more skilled position than assembly line work. obviously my numbers are rough, but you get the idea

"But that would be to expensive when one is damaged!" /s

It's pretty simple:

Robots are very expensive. And ones that could do this type of work cost even more. Nor are they smart enough to be able to reason ahead and envision danger. So they would get crushed in cave ins a lot.

Human males, and yes its vastly men that do mining, are cheap and in plentiful supply. They can do at least some rudimentary reasoning and will get crushed less often. And if you lose a few, well they are easily and cheaply replaced. Making them far more profitable to use.

As an aside, companies are designing and building robotic construction equipment these days. It's just that none of you hang around with such "dirty trades".

Is this account just a repost bot?

Yeah, I recently watched some chinese robots dancing on america's got talent. What a world. smh.

Mining robots won't become computer God, silly! /s

Turns out human-like kinesthetics is a harder problem than spreadsheets. Who knew

people have been complaining about machines taking jobs since the 1800's

If a robot is being remote-controlled by a human, surely that's using Real Intelligence, not Artificial Intelligence

As long as they don't solve material coat issue for sophisticated and specialized robot, let alone how their ai work without failure, robot will always be defeated by ol reliable cheap human miners.

Why would I want to make PowerPoint??