this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2025

129 points (92.2% liked)

Technology

75513 readers

2572 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related news or articles.
Be excellent to each other!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

L3s@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

L4s@lemmy.world

L3s@hackingne.ws

L4s@hackingne.ws

129

AI-powered 20 foot robots coming for construction workers' jobs (www.theregister.com)

submitted 5 months ago by cm0002@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

36 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 37 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] MrAlternateTape@lemm.ee 40 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yea, well...for the heavy lifting it could be nice. But I'm not letting AI build my house.

Lifting heay crap to the roof or something like that? Sure. That is what machines are good at.

Welding? Well welding robots have existed for long time, they just need to programmed perfectly. I've worked with a couple of them, the results are not always consistent and they required some quality checks. It is easier. Manual welding takes more skill and takes longer. I just don't need the AI part though. That makes it unpredictable. And if I let a robot do something, it should be predictable.

I do woodworking and fixing around the house. Even when building new stuff, there are always issues that you have to solve on the spot. Walls that are not straight, angles that are not perfect, spaces you cannot reach et cetera.

As long as AI does not get it 100% right every time it is not touching my house. And yes, a professional doesn't reach that rate either, but at least they know and doublecheck themselves and know how to fix things.

[+] FaceDeer@fedia.io -16 points 5 months ago (2 children)

AI can also know to doublecheck themselves and how to fix things.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

(Read: “I don’t actually understand how ML works”)

It’s not AI. Stop calling it AI.

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The term "artificial intelligence" has been in use since the 1950s and it encompasses a wide range of fields in computer science. Machine learning is most definitely included under that umbrella.

Why do you think an AI can't double check things and fix them when it notices problems? It's a fairly straightforward process.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

The halting problem. Machines cannot, by logic, double check themselves.

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io -1 points 5 months ago

The halting problem is an abstract mathematical issue, in actual real-world scenarios it's trivial to handle cases where you don't know how long the process will run. Just add a check to watch for the process running too long and break into some kind of handler when that happens.

I'm a professional programmer, I deal with this kind of thing all the time. I've literally written applications using LLMs that do this.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

What are you trying to argue, that humans aren't Turing-complete? Which would be an insane self-own. That we can decide the undecidable? That would prove you don't know what you're talking about, it's called undecidable for a reason. Deciding an undecidable problem makes as much sense as a barber who shaves everyone who doesn't shave themselves.

Aside from that why would you assume that checking results would, in general, involve solving the halting problem.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It has nothing to do with whether humans are Turing complete or not. No Turing machine is capable of solving an undecidable. But humans can solve undecidables. Machines cannot solve the problem the way a human would. So, no, humans are not machines.

This by definition limits the autonomy a machine can achieve. A human can predict when a task will cause a logic halt and prepare or adapt accordingly, a machine can't. Unless intentionally limited by a programmer to stop being Turing complete and account for the undecidables before hand (thus with the help of the human). This is why machines suck at unpredictable or ambiguous task that humans fulfill effortlessly on the daily.

This is why a machine that adapts to the real world is so hard to make. This is why autonomous cars can only drive in pristine weather, on detailed premapped roads with really high maintenance, with a vast array of sensors. This is why robot factories are extremely controlled and regulated environments. This is why you have to rescue your roomba regularly. Operating on the biggest undecidable there is (e.g. future parameters of operations) is the biggest yet unsolved technological problem (next to sensor integration on world parametrization and modeling). Machine learning is a step towards it, in a several thousand miles long road yet to be traversed.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee -1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

But humans can solve undecidables.

No, we can't. Or, more precisely said: There is no version of your assertion which would be compatible with cause and effect, would be compatible with physics as we understand it.

Don't blame me I didn't do it. The universe just is that way.

[–] dustyData@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yet we live in a world where millions of humans assert their will over undecidables every day. Because we can make irrational decisions, logic be damned. Explain that one.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee -1 points 5 months ago

That's not deciding anything in the information-theoretical sense. We rely a lot on approximations and heuristics when it comes to day to day functioning.

You can't decide the halting problem by saying "I'll have a glance at it and go with whatever I think after thinking about it for half a second". That's not deciding the problem that's giving up on it and computers are perfectly capable of doing that.

[–] MrAlternateTape@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Well, why did it not do it right the first time then? If the doublecheck gives a different result, then which is the right result? If I can ask the same question twice and I get two different answers, how I or the machine known which is the right answer? And if the machine knows, then why would it need to doublecheck? A machine can do it right the first time if it knows how, right?

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You said:

As long as AI does not get it 100% right every time it is not touching my house. And yes, a professional doesn't reach that rate either, but at least they know and doublecheck themselves and know how to fix things.

Well, why didn't the human professional not do it right the first time then? If it's okay for a human professional to make mistakes because they can double check and fix their mistakes, why is not okay for machines to do likewise?

[–] MrAlternateTape@lemm.ee 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Because a machine is expected to do it right the first time. Because it's supposed to do the exact same thing everytime with the exact same input parameters. If you give it the exact same input every time and you get a different result every time it is not reliable to function as automation.

Humans are just that. Humans. They make mistakes sometimes. The reason humans can keep doing the work is that there is no better alternative. Machines can't do it, so who else is gonna do it? Either humans build your house or nobody does. There is little choice there.

So if a machine is to take over that job, it better do it right and reliable and cheaper.Because humans can already do it right and reliable. And there's little money saving if a human still needs to check all the work.

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 0 points 5 months ago

Because a machine is expected to do it right the first time.

No, it's not. And it doesn't have to because as I pointed out it can check its work.

You've got a mistaken impression of how AI works, and how machines in general work. They can make mistakes and can recognize and correct those mistakes. I'm a programmer, I have plenty of first hand experience. I've written code that does it myself.

So if a machine is to take over that job, it better do it right and reliable and cheaper.

Yes, that's the plan.

[+] LostXOR@fedia.io 29 points 5 months ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

[deleted]

[–] SouthEndSunset@lemm.ee 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

That’s why it won’t happen. Plus the rich have an interest in keeping you in your place.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 5 months ago

I thought the rich had an interest in replacing everyone.

Presumably their end goal is to reduce the human population to themselves and their mates.

[–] desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone -5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

the robot doesn't need sleep, won't get sick, and could (assuming they actually want to be competitive with human labor) require fewer safety precautions on the site (just make the entire area where the robots are as being hazardous and ensure that things won't fall out of it) allowing for a roof to be constructed before the walls then building the walls underneath it.

[–] Ruxias@lemmy.world 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

You've never worked construction, at least not on the GC level. You'd be flabbergasted by how much human input and decision-making there is in any building. Constant discussions about constructibility, safety, value, coordination, and on an on. A lot of these discussion lean on experience of the construction team. Robots can't replace experience of construction workers period. There's far too many variables that robots or people who have never been "in the field" can't account for.

Some parts of construction have been helped by automation (see layout robots, CNC cabinetry fabricators, etc.) but that's drop in the bucket of a massive industry. The human element will not be removed from construction.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 5 months ago

I've often wondered why big businesses particularly supermarkets have preferred designs. After all as you say every environment is different, so it's not like they can just have pre-completed parts.

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)

What to I do? I'm a construction worker. Yeah I work construction. Early in the morning I press this button on my phone to start the robots. Then I run around with this brush and backup vacuum cleaning all the rolling surfaces. Yup, that's construction alright!

[–] DrunkenPirate@feddit.org 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

What do I do? I‘m a cooker. Yeah I cook meals. Early in the morning I press this button and meals get ready and dishes cleaned and served. That’s cooking today.

I love it old school. Cooking on a stove, cleaning dishes by hand and peeling vegetables manually. Automation is evil, you know, it takes jobs. That’s why I cook on a stove

[–] altphoto@lemmy.today 3 points 5 months ago

Lol, you don't love modern cooking.... Go to Amazon and buy a new one when the old one burns out?

[–] Nyticus@kbin.melroy.org 11 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Until these things are actually building skyscrapers in hours, I'm not concerned.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 2 points 5 months ago

There are ways that humans can build skyscrapers in a matter of a couple of weeks. We just don't tend to do it because time isn't really an important factor and it's expensive.

I'm sure we could make skyscraper building robots capable of completing the construction in a matter of hours, I'm just not sure where the utility in doing that is.

[–] ShadowRam@fedia.io 10 points 5 months ago

No they're not.

[–] j0ester@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I was at a conference, and they were making AI-based vehicles around boat docks - since they said they couldn’t find workers to drive trucks everyday in the port. And also, they were discussing about AI machines doing way more than just 1 thing (like what we currently have).

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 5 months ago

I know they already have AI controlled cargo container cranes (the big square ones you see at docks). That's a pretty easy task to automate since the manifest will already contain all of the information about all of the containers.

[–] lka1988@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 5 months ago

are we sure we want to outsource the welding?

The Register when someone informs them of robotic welders in vehicle manufacturing:

[–] sommerset@thelemmy.club 2 points 5 months ago

They keep trying that but they are not working out. Like all those pancakes concrete house printers. Just failing

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com -2 points 5 months ago

Fake news.

[+] DrunkenPirate@feddit.org -10 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Well done. It’s needed so urgent. Craftman still work like in the 60-90ies. They are sooo old school. And call it „tradition“.

If they use a laser for measuring things, that‘s advanced. If they use a smartphone and digital apps for notes and customer contact (instead of pen and manual notebook) that’s advanced. Wtf.

I had quite many craftman in my house last years and it’s unbelievable how they work nowadays. Two of them even didn‘t send me a final invoice. Well, that’s stupid backoffice work. Many couldn‘t send me an offering after having a (time consuming) site visit at my house. One showed up twice because he lost his paper with the measurements. And didn‘t send an offering.

Nono, I lost all my respect about any modern capabilities of craftman. It’s insanely old schooled.

Coming back to the 3d printer: How is construction building up a house nowadays? One after the other is doing their work. Nobody thinks ahead. How do they lay out pipes, lighting or power lines? By cutting into the wall. Why? Because of tradition. Any documentation? With pen and notebook? No way. How laying tiles in a bathroom? Showing up with a stack of tiles and cut it one by one. Laser measure it first and cut ahead at their shop to save time? Well, the leaning walls and tradition, they will answer.

I do not wonder that building up houses became insanely costly.

Sorry for my rant. But my experience were just eyeblowing and frustrating. (And as my mother was a craftman I know that matter a bit)

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I was disappointed when this didn't turn into satire.

[–] DrunkenPirate@feddit.org 0 points 5 months ago

I‘m very sorry. Just a frustrated guy

[–] bluGill@fedia.io 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Not doing back office work is stupid.

the rest is a good thing as technology would just cost money for no gain. The old ways work. Pen and paper is cheap and it works unlike the expensive advanced gadgets you seen to think are automatitally good without any critical thinking.

[–] DrunkenPirate@feddit.org 0 points 5 months ago

Their entire process is broken. Usually the one who does the site visit isn’t the one who does the work and who does the invoice. How to connect those people if not with eg. an CRM? By paper and phone?

Two weeks ago, I got a new heat pump for heating. Everything, that I discussed ahead with the salesguys wasn‘t known by the construction team. Wtf. I had to explain and discuss it again. Some calls and mails to the sales guy included.

Pen and paper is crap. No documentation, no archive, no easy workflow. Not talking about errors due to data entry issues into different excelwhatever crap. As said one showed up twice as he lost his paper with the measures. He was the boss btw.

Those companies that are setting up modern, digital processes will take over the rest. At least here in Germany, where the youth has no desire to work as back in the 90ies (including the hierarchies and sexism that is called tradition)