If your robotics startup looking to raise, there’s almost a 100% chance you’ll get two questions from potential investors: 1) How do you incorporate genetic AI? and 2) Have you thought about making a humanoid? The first is fairly easy to answer. If you’re running a robotics company in 2024, you’ve almost certainly experimented with incorporating genetic AI into your workflow.
The second is one of those investor questions that requires you to look hard and say something like, “you know, hominids have potential, but they’re not right for this particular challenge.” Then you hit a set of keys and try to quickly change the subject. It’s not an outright rejection of the form factor, so much as an admission that — despite investor enthusiasm — it’s not the ideal tool for every job.
It is reasonable to suspect that we have entered the peak of the robotic hype cycle. Figure’s recent $675 million raise dropped countless jaws across the industry and left open the question of how sustainable this market is. Featured this week is the Modex supply chain
Atlanta told its own story – one populated by very few humanoids.
Exactly two were present among the three huge halls of the Georgia World Convention Center. The most important was Agility. In a repeat of last year’s ProMat event, the company drew massive crowds throughout the week. This time around, Digit showed off upgraded hands, new software and a workflow developed for the automotive industry. A lot of progress has been made since last year’s event, from product to executive staff to serious discussions about things like ROI.
Agility currently stands alone in market advancement. The Digit debates seem less theoretical than much of the humanoid competition, but real-world development questions remain. Some of the people I spoke to on the show this week made sure to use the word “PILOT” (all caps) to distinguish smaller-scale test deployments from larger-scale adoption. Pilot is not a dirty word in this industry (nor is it unique to humanoids), it is a standard and sensitive thing associated with new technology.
It’s more that the pilots are experimental and should be seen as such. There’s a big gap between a company piloting a handful of devices and being so committed to a new technology that you overhaul your manufacturing or warehouse processes to incorporate it. The two are linked, of course, as the former is generally required to achieve the latter, but coverage may be too eager to merge the two. There are countless examples of pilots that never completed full-scale development for many reasons.
A big reason why pilots are played so much is that they are generally beneficial to both parties. The company selling the product gets — if not validation, at least clear interest from an established company. The company, meanwhile, is signaling to shareholders and customers that it is on top of the latest technologies that could help it compete in this unlikely world of late capitalism. Pilots are absolutely worth watching and mark important milestones for startups, but at the end of the day, the growth numbers are the real thing to watch.
Several of the players I spoke with continued to express skepticism about the widespread adoption of humanoid robots in the workplace. As always, it’s important to take this material with a grain of salt and consider the source. If your company makes robotic arms and/or AMRs (autonomous mobile robots), you no doubt have a vested interest in believing that these form factors will continue to dominate the field as they have for decades.
Last week, however, I noticed a change in the conversations compared to last year. It could very well be the progress that companies like Agility have made in terms of technology, customer interest, fundraising and the continued hiring of very smart people. Whatever the cause, the sheer skepticism surrounding hominids has softened for many. I heard very few outright rejections of the humanoid form factor. The typical response was close to measured optimism.
These same people now see a role for humanoids in the factory, but rather than completely replacing more traditional single-purpose systems, robots will serve to augment them. Essentially, these robots would replace humans in systems known as “human-in-the-loop,” which require non-mechanical intervention. Maybe now is the time to start talking about hominids-in-the-loop. For now, though, the human element is essential.
People often point to this as proof that automation is not replacing jobs. Many manufacturers also remain adamant that humans will always have a role to play here. Earlier this week, Plus One Robotics CEO Erik Nieves told me the meaning behind the company’s name, noting, “You have to add a human if you’re going to increase reliability over time.”
These things are impossible to fully predict, but that won’t stop us from trying — or from having strong and unshakable opinions on the matter. This is one of those places where my skepticism/cynicism (depending on the day) is on full display. I think it’s important to consider capitalist motives. Seriously ask yourself: If this or that company could save pennies by fully automating the production and warehousing departments, do you think they would hesitate to do so?
Factories that turn off the lights are few and far between. Manufacturing is particularly well-suited for full automation as it is a highly structured environment, based on highly repeatable workflows. But while people are not present every day, extreme cases will always exist. These situations, which now require human intervention, could be the ideal scenario for humanoids, whether operating autonomously or remotely, as in the case of Reflex, the other humanoid robotics company present in Modex.
“If you start thinking about production without lights, there’s always that 5% of exceptions that need to be addressed,” GreyOrange CEO Akash Gupta told me during a chat at the company’s booth this week. “I think that’s the role [humanoids] they are going to play in the warehouse. They will bridge that 5% exemption gap, which takes a lot of skill and unstructured execution.”
Dexterity’s founding engineer Robert Sun pointed out to me earlier this week that the timeframes may ultimately be out of sync for broader deployments of humanoid robots. He suggested that while the form factor could play an important role in the transition to lights-out factories and warehouses, the technology might not be where it needs to be in time to make much sense.
“Transitioning all the logistics and warehousing work to robotic work, I thought humanoids could be a good transition point,” explains Sun. “Now we don’t have the human, so we’ll put the humanoid in there. Eventually, we’ll be transported to this automated lights-off factory. Then the humanoid issue which is very difficult makes it difficult to put them in the transition period.”
Timing is key here. After all, many of these systems are positioned as “general purpose,” though anyone familiar with the space understands that this promise is a stretch. The question, ultimately, is how invaluable these systems can become in the meantime. This is exactly why these pilots are important – it’s also why much of the messaging has shifted to ROI.
Humanoid robotics companies can promise the world on the road, and certainly the form factor is much more customizable than the many or more single-purpose systems that currently dominate warehouse and factory floors. Ultimately, however, bridging the gap between now and then will require systems that can prove their worth from day one.
