Siddhartha “Sid” Srinivas Robotics has spent his career in the intersection of research and real-world deployment. He helped to start Berkshire Gray, launched the Amazon Robotics AI group, helped re -archite the autonomy stack of Cruise, and as a professor, the private robotics lab at Washington University.
Now Added to a new role: Madrona Venture Group’s Venture Partner, where he will help to shape investment and evaluate startups in robotics and embraced AI at the Seatol-based firm.
Gikware was caught in conversation with Srinivas, the status of robotics, the opportunities of entrepreneurs, and why he believed that Seattle could be a global leader in AI and Robotics. The interview was performed for Bravity and precision.
Gikwire: Why did you decide to join Madron?
Sid Srinivas: “I want to return the Pacific North -West and make the Pacific North West as a greater superpower of AI and Robotics. I am really fortunately fortunately to work with some great VC in my time in Berkshire Gray, and how to think about it is to think about how it is to think about an initiative.” How to accept, “This robot should consider,” how it accepts, “how to accept this robot,”
Where is the robotics now in terms of progress?
Srinivas: “Hardware has become productive. A humanoid robot used to spend a few million dollars, only in top labs you can get a large part of $ 20,000 to $ 20,000. A large part of this is because electric motors have been better and cheaper and their ability to produce and make them is better.
It is also counting. It is more important now that my phone is more calculated than the biggest computer I got on my PhD.
Making large foundation models is also productive. And what the Foundation models help us to do is to deal with all the common sense staff that does any work done ”
What about the current challenges?
Srinivas: “At this point we have the huge problem we have with robotics, though we have been able to address common sense work like folding your laundry or clearing your table – these are not important tasks that people will pay. This is a fundamental problem that is now facing a robotics? I am.
Robotics have a last mile problem. We can go from zero to one, one to 10, 10 to 50 – but very short time we have actually been able to go the last mile. We certainly did it in the Berkshire Gray. We certainly did it on Amazon and with perfection. But beyond perfection, I have not seen any great success in robotics. “
What is technically missing?
Srinivas: “We need a breakthrough in generalization the other day, when I was giving my fence a stain, when I completed 20%, I was a specialist Steiner that is that adaptation is that our robots need Rug with efficiently
I thought we would solve the self-driving before we solve the common purpose robotics. And we haven’t resolved the self-driving yet. We’re near, but still not there. And I would say that the general purpose of robotics is definitely five years behind self-driving in terms of ability and technology. “
What about Humanoids?
Srinivas: “I’m not sure whether the Humanoid Form Factor is the correct form factor to align around. Humans have two arms and two legs ‘just’ because we have nothing theoretically favorable about it. Perhaps what you need is a robot with three arms, or a robot with seven fingers-I believe that no robots in our house will be effective.”
Which sectors look closest to the effective unit economy?
Srinivas: “There is still plenty of juice left for suppressing perfection there is more than 50 to 60% perfection that has not yet been automatically done-we need to be able to deal with such high concentrations with such high concentrations.
I was really interested in counting agriculture from the point of view of observation – knowing what’s going on in the greenhouse without walking the line. And the commissary kitchen that produces lunch which is provided or airline food. If we are able to make robots that can be easily re -expressed and can perform multiple tasks and put a small form factor in a small form that I think is a place that can really disrupt “
What advice do you have for the founders of robotics?
Srinivas: “There should be a tension for robotics, no push you are if you are paddling the robotics to people who are involuntarily accepting it, it will never work the tension will never come from the real customer needs.
The second thing I would say is that robots have this tendency to believe that the software model can follow. Software maintenance, servicing and taking care of the software are really easy. However, it is not the case for real, physical robots. I am not just the original application, I will also think very carefully about the robots you are leaving there ”
How do you think about robotics and work displacement?
Srinivas: “Ever since I started working on the robots, I was very appropriately asked: The robots will take our job? The lazy argument is that the industrial revolution has created more jobs than it is to create more jobs, so it is not Robotics. But it is not the people who got their jobs that we got a new job, we were in front of us. We need to be able to work with new technology of staff and this is not a great thing.
Any thoughts in Seattle as Robotics Hub?
Srinivas: “I think about Seattle and especially the University of Washington is an incredibly applicant, which I think is a pioneer in it, it is exactly how the faculty is able to work with the industry while maintaining their faculty position and respect.
I love Seattle I think it’s also incredibly valuable for a dual career. And I think this is not just because of the madron, but many more VCs, as well as a great place to start a company here because of a lot of talent. So I think it’s time to make Seattle the best of the world in AI and Robotics “”