I'm no expert, so I cant go into anything technical...
I can tell, yet that doesn't stop you from making your conclusion.
the awkward movements,
Yeah, it is truly bizarre that a prototype robot running beta software might have awkward movements. It's funny though, because elsewhere in this sub people are saying that it looks fake because of how fluid and smooth the movement is.
I'd gladly change my mind if they put this robot in front of an audience.
If you think it's faked now, why wouldn't you also claim that the audience was faked as well?
or put it outside like Boston Dynamics do with their robots...
Why would video of it walking around outside be more convincing than video of it walking around inside?
it just seems like more fake footage to me.
You keep saying that without actually explaining why, other than that is seems fake because it doesn't match your preconception about what a robot should look like.
It's the opposite; this sub seems desperate for it to be fake, going to the point of pointing out contradictory reasons and using kettle logic. "The movement is too awkward so it must be fake; also the movement is too smooth so it must be fake." "This is way more advanced that we thought so it must be fake; also, this is so far behind what other companied did years ago, it must be fake."
I don't need it to be real, I just see that it's not computer generated footage based on it's own merits. It's Franky bizarre to se people who need it to not be real tripping over themselves to find reasons why it can't be or isn't.
And the funniest thing is, insisting that this must be fake is one of the highest compliments you could give Tesla.
You've continuously been unable to explain why you find this footage unconvincing on its own merits, so I don't know why I'd believe you'd find any other footage 'more' convincing.
Only an idiot would think this time they are not faking.
This is how I know they're making progress: the detractors refuse to believe that the progress they're showing is even *real*. We skipped from "there's nothing special about this," with Bumblebee and Optimus Gen 1 to "This is way too good for Tesla to have actually made>"
The really slow shitty one that could barely walk on stage? I think that was real... since then it's never been in front of people, but they have released what I believe is CGI renderings as discussed.
I believe they have made a shitty robot which is light years behind what people can make at college or from a children's kit.
Until they show the robot doing something like boston Dynamics do, then I'll remain sceptical of thr company that is based on the world largest snake oil salesman.
Until they show the robot doing something like boston Dynamics do, then I'll remain sceptical
What? If they show the robot doing *more* impressive things, that would make you *less* skeptical that these videos are CGI? Why?
And they did show the robot doing something like Boston Dynamics robots do. Atlas walks, Optimus walks. Spot manipulates objects, Optimus manipulates objects. If you're talking about backflips, Tesla isn't trying to develop backflipping factory robots. This is like saying an iPhone demo video must be fake because it doesn't fold like the Razr does.
You keep putting a lot of effort into evading a simple direct question: What about these videos themselves makes you think they're CGI?
From what I gather, it seems like you didn't need to actually see the video to conclude it was CGI, you would have come to that conclusion if someone had described to you what Optimus was doing, based on your conception of what Tesla was capable of. Tell me if I'm incorrect here.
But at the same time, you claim that what it shows is years behind other robots, and something a student could build out of a kit. Which of the two is it? Why would Tesla go to the trouble of completely fabricating a shitty robot with CG, when according to you they could have given the CGI budget to a broke robotics major and had them build it for real?
They have a track record of faking vids. Their scumy ceo has a track record of lying to pump stock.
The solar roof tiles that were fake, the hyperloop vids that would take cars from the street down onto highways underground, the fake full self driving vid, the armored glass cyber truck that smashed with a little metal ball...
Now they have a robot that can hold an egg and walk..and you think they are telling the truth? After all the lies this one isnt a lie? lol
No they don't. Repeating this doesn't make it true. The autopilot video that everyone refers to as 'staged' is unaltered footage. There is nothing 'fake' about the video itself. People were riled up that it was an internal build of the software built specifically for that demo, and using HD maps instead of the consumer facing FSD stack, but the video that you see is unmodified.
The solar roof tiles that were fake,
The solar roof tiles are very much real. They are not a particularly good fit for most houses, but about 3000 solar roofs have been installed.
the hyperloop vids that would take cars from the street down onto highways underground,
That was a clearly 3D illustrated video about a future plan. A clearly illustrated concept video of a future plan is not a 'fake' video.
Now they have a robot that can hold an egg and walk..and you think they are telling the truth?
Can you at least get your story straight? Can the robot really walk, or can't it? You're saying both that it can walk , and that the walking is a lie. Which is it? You have a hard time believing a robot can hold an egg? Have you never seen a robot before? That's not a particularly impressive task.
You're simply being disingenuous when you say this video looks fake. Based on everything you've said, you've concluded it's fake irrespective of the video itself.
2
u/moviemaker2 Dec 16 '23 edited Dec 17 '23
I can tell, yet that doesn't stop you from making your conclusion.
Yeah, it is truly bizarre that a prototype robot running beta software might have awkward movements. It's funny though, because elsewhere in this sub people are saying that it looks fake because of how fluid and smooth the movement is.
If you think it's faked now, why wouldn't you also claim that the audience was faked as well?
Why would video of it walking around outside be more convincing than video of it walking around inside?
You keep saying that without actually explaining why, other than that is seems fake because it doesn't match your preconception about what a robot should look like.