Physical AI: Humanoid Robots, Industrial Autonomy and the Machine That Leaves the Screen

· by · in Critical Technology. ·
Investigative industrial robotics image showing a humanoid robot working in a factory surrounded by diagrams of vision-language-action AI, tactile hands, batteries, actuators, simulation, safety and fleet learning.

SURVXCOM CRITICAL TECHNOLOGY STACK / PHYSICAL AI REPORT

Why humanoid robots are moving from research demonstrations into factories, logistics networks and service environments—and why the real race is not to build a machine that looks human, but one that can perceive, reason, manipulate, recover, stay powered and work safely enough to become useful infrastructure.

Technology Stack Article 018

CRITICAL TECHNOLOGY HUB: Explore the complete 30-article SURVXCOM Critical Technology reading path. This article belongs to the Defense, Autonomy & Physical Systems lane.

EDITOR’S NOTE: This report examines physical AI and humanoid robotics at the systems level. It distinguishes laboratory demonstrations, controlled pilots, customer deployments, commercial agreements, production manufacturing and broad operating fleets. Vendor claims are attributed. Safety standards are identified by actual status: final international standards where published, working drafts or committee drafts where still under development.

Artificial intelligence is leaving the screen. For most of the modern AI boom, the machine lived behind glass.

You typed.

It answered.

You uploaded a file.

It analyzed it.

You asked for code.

It generated code.

The physical world remained somebody else’s problem. Robotics changes that.

A robot cannot merely produce a plausible sentence. It has to know whether the box is actually in its hand.

It has to understand whether the floor is slippery. It has to move its center of mass.

It has to avoid crushing a finger.

It has to distinguish a person from a pallet. It has to decide how much force to apply.

It has to recover when the object is not where expected. It has to manage batteries, motors, heat, calibration and wear.

And it has to do all of that repeatedly. That is why physical AI is a more demanding test of intelligence than a benchmark score.

The robotics industry has spent decades mastering narrow automation. Industrial arms weld the same seam thousands of times.

Automated guided vehicles follow marked routes. Warehouse systems move standardized bins.

Machine vision checks known parts.

These systems can be extraordinarily productive because the environment is engineered around them. Humanoid robotics attempts something different.

Instead of redesigning every workplace around the robot, the robot is designed to enter environments already built for humans. Stairs are human-sized.

Doors are human-sized.

Tools have human handles.

Shelves are placed at human heights. Factories, warehouses, kitchens, hospitals and homes are full of objects whose geometry assumes hands, arms and upright mobility.

The humanoid form is therefore not merely aesthetic. It is an interoperability strategy for the physical world.

In 2026, that strategy is beginning to cross from demonstration into deployment. Boston Dynamics says it is manufacturing the production version of Atlas now, with 2026 deployments scheduled at Hyundai and Google DeepMind.

Agility Robotics says Digit has moved more than 100,000 totes in a live GXO deployment and has signed a commercial Robots-as-a-Service agreement with Toyota Motor Manufacturing Canada following a pilot. Figure says Figure 02 contributed to production involving 30,000 BMW vehicles before its latest Figure 03 returned to BMW’s Spartanburg plant in June 2026 for a more complex logistics workflow.

Apptronik has raised nearly $1 billion and is scaling Apollo deployments with partners including Mercedes-Benz, GXO and Jabil. NVIDIA is building an entire development stack around what it calls physical AI: simulation, synthetic data, robot foundation models, vision-language-action models, onboard inference and digital twins.

The result is not yet a general-purpose robot economy. But it is no longer a collection of isolated science-fair demonstrations either. The next question is much harder: Can humanoid robots become reliable enough, safe enough, cheap enough and useful enough to earn recurring work?

Key Judgments

  • Humanoid robotics is crossing from prototype into early commercial deployment. Several vendors now have robots operating in real factories or logistics facilities, but broad fleet scale remains limited.
  • The humanoid body is an interface to human-built environments. Its advantage is not that human shape is mechanically optimal, but that the world is already optimized around humans.
  • Walking is no longer the central bottleneck. Dexterous manipulation, perception, long-horizon task execution, reliability, recovery and safety now matter more.
  • Vision-language-action models are becoming a new robotics control layer. They attempt to connect perception and language directly to physical action.
  • Simulation is becoming industrial infrastructure. Digital twins and synthetic data reduce the cost of collecting dangerous or rare real-world training experience.
  • Teleoperation remains important. Human demonstrations provide training data, fallback capability and a bridge between scripted automation and autonomous behavior.
  • Battery life and power density constrain useful work. A robot that can perform a task but cannot remain productive through a shift may not be economically competitive.
  • Hands may be harder than legs. Grasping irregular, deformable, fragile and unfamiliar objects reliably is still one of the hardest robotics problems.
  • Safety is becoming a standards problem. ISO published revised industrial robot safety standards in 2025 and is now developing additional standards for dynamically stable mobile robots such as bipeds and quadrupeds.
  • Vendor demos are not the same as operating fleets. A polished video can prove capability without proving uptime, cost, throughput or maintainability.
  • Robots-as-a-Service may accelerate adoption. Leasing shifts capital cost and maintenance risk away from the customer and toward the robotics vendor.
  • The true competition is an integrated stack. Model, sensors, actuators, hands, batteries, compute, simulation, safety, manufacturing and service all have to work together.

What Physical AI Actually Means

Physical AI is an industry phrase rather than one universally standardized technical category. NVIDIA uses it to describe AI systems that perceive, reason and act in the real world.

The distinction from conventional software is embodiment. A language model can generate an incorrect answer and still continue operating.

A robot can collide with a person.

That difference changes the engineering stack. A physical system needs perception.

It needs state estimation.

It needs planning.

It needs control.

It needs real-time execution.

It needs safety constraints.

And it needs physical hardware capable of carrying out the command. The intelligence is inseparable from the body.

SENSORS
vision • touch • force • position
      ↓
PERCEPTION
what is here?
      ↓
WORLD MODEL
what is happening?
      ↓
REASONING / TASK PLAN
what should happen next?
      ↓
MOTION / MANIPULATION POLICY
how should the body move?
      ↓
ACTUATORS
motors • hands • joints
      ↓
PHYSICAL WORLD
      ↓
NEW SENSOR DATA

THE LOOP RUNS CONTINUOUSLY

Why Humanoid?

A humanoid is not the mechanically optimal answer to every task. Wheels are usually more energy-efficient than legs.

A fixed robot arm can be stiffer and more precise than a mobile humanoid. A conveyor can move material faster than a person-shaped machine carrying boxes.

A specialized industrial robot may outperform a humanoid at one repetitive operation for years. The argument for humanoids is different.

Human environments already exist.

A humanoid can theoretically use the same aisle, shelf, staircase, cart, tool, machine control and workstation as a person. That can reduce the amount of infrastructure redesign required.

The shape is therefore a compatibility layer. But that advantage only matters if the humanoid’s flexibility outweighs the mechanical complexity of balance, legs, hands and a large number of actuators.

The Physical AI Stack

The robot visible in a demonstration is the top of a much larger system. The full stack reaches from data-center training to motors in the joints.

FOUNDATION / WORLD MODELS
        ↓
ROBOT POLICY / VLA MODEL
        ↓
TRAINING DATA
human demos • robot logs • simulation
        ↓
SIMULATION / DIGITAL TWIN
        ↓
ONBOARD COMPUTE
GPU / accelerator / real-time controller
        ↓
PERCEPTION
cameras • depth • force • tactile
        ↓
STATE ESTIMATION
pose • balance • object state
        ↓
MOTION PLANNING
        ↓
ACTUATORS
motors • drives • gearboxes
        ↓
HANDS / END EFFECTORS
        ↓
BATTERY + POWER SYSTEM
        ↓
PHYSICAL TASK

UNDER EVERYTHING:
SAFETY • MANUFACTURING • MAINTENANCE • SERVICE

Boston Dynamics Atlas: From Research Icon to Product

Boston Dynamics spent years turning Atlas into a symbol of high-end robotics research. The hydraulic Atlas ran, jumped, climbed and performed dynamic maneuvers that demonstrated extraordinary control.

But a research machine is not automatically a product. Boston Dynamics redesigned Atlas as an all-electric industrial humanoid.

At CES in January 2026, the company unveiled what it calls the product version and said manufacturing would begin immediately at its Boston headquarters. The company says all 2026 deployments are committed, with units scheduled for Hyundai’s Robotics Metaplant Application Center and Google DeepMind.

Its commercial roadmap begins with industrial tasks such as sequencing, machine tending and order building. The technical shift is important.

The old Atlas proved that dynamic humanoid control was possible. The new Atlas has to prove something less theatrical and more difficult:

that it can keep working.

Production robots need maintainability. They need predictable uptime.

They need fleet management.

They need safe failure behavior.

They need replaceable parts.

They need customer integration.

They need service technicians.

A backflip is impressive. Six months of reliable shift work is economically transformative.

Figure and the Vision-Language-Action Bet

Figure is pursuing a more explicitly AI-centered route. Its Figure 03 robot is designed around Helix, Figure’s vision-language-action system.

Instead of programming each movement as an isolated industrial sequence, a VLA model attempts to map visual input and instructions into physical actions. Figure says Helix 02 extends this architecture from upper-body manipulation to full-body control.

In January 2026, the company released a demonstration of Figure 03 autonomously unloading and reloading a dishwasher over a roughly four-minute sequence without resets or human intervention. The demonstration included walking, balancing, bimanual manipulation and long-horizon action sequencing.

Figure also demonstrated fine manipulation tasks including opening a bottle, extracting a pill and controlling a syringe plunger. These are vendor demonstrations.

They do not establish broad household autonomy or medical suitability. But they illustrate where the technical frontier is moving:

from scripted pose sequences toward models that coordinate the whole body around a task. Figure has also accumulated more industrial evidence.

The company says Figure 02 operated at BMW’s Spartanburg plant during 2025 and contributed to production involving 30,000 vehicles. In June 2026, Figure 03 returned to BMW for a logistics sequencing workflow requiring it to manipulate parts while repositioning its body and pulling a heavy cart.

The critical maturity distinction remains: a successful customer deployment is not yet a broad fleet. But it is stronger evidence than a laboratory demo.

Agility Digit: The Commercial Deployment Test

Agility Robotics has deliberately focused on logistics rather than trying to make Digit appear maximally human. Digit has legs, arms and a torso but is designed around material handling.

Its strongest evidence is operational rather than theatrical. Agility says Digit has moved more than 100,000 totes in a commercial GXO deployment.

The company and GXO signed a multi-year Robots-as-a-Service agreement after an earlier pilot. In February 2026, Toyota Motor Manufacturing Canada signed a commercial RaaS agreement with Agility following its own pilot.

That matters because commercial robotics ultimately lives or dies on throughput. A robot has to perform thousands of cycles under changing lighting, object placement, congestion and human activity.

It has to recover from errors.

It has to integrate with warehouse management systems and existing automation. It has to produce useful work at a cost the customer understands. Digit therefore represents one of the clearest current tests of whether humanoid form can move beyond experimentation into measurable return on investment.

Apptronik Apollo: Building a Commercial Ecosystem

Apptronik’s Apollo is another major U.S. humanoid platform.

The company has partnerships with Mercedes-Benz, GXO Logistics and Jabil and is building training and data infrastructure with Google DeepMind. In February 2026, Apptronik announced a $520 million extension to its Series A financing, bringing the round above $935 million and total capital raised close to $1 billion.

The company says the money will support increased Apollo production, commercial deployments and robot-training infrastructure. By June, Apptronik was describing fleets of Apollo 2 robots operating across Robot Park training facilities and customer sites to collect real-world data.

That points toward another important industry structure: robot manufacturing and AI training are becoming one feedback loop. Every deployed robot can generate new examples.

Those examples can improve the policy. The improved policy can be deployed back to the fleet. That is conceptually similar to autonomous-vehicle development.

Tesla Optimus and the Scale Thesis

Tesla’s Optimus program is built around a different strategic advantage: manufacturing scale. Tesla describes Optimus as a general-purpose bipedal autonomous humanoid intended for unsafe, repetitive or boring tasks.

Its AI strategy draws from capabilities developed for vehicle autonomy: vision, planning, inference hardware and large-scale data systems. The thesis is straightforward.

If humanoid robots become a high-volume manufactured product, Tesla already knows how to build complex electro-mechanical machines at automotive scale. But the maturity distinction remains important.

Tesla’s public materials establish that Optimus is an active development program. They do not by themselves establish broad external commercial fleet deployment comparable to a mature industrial automation product.

For Optimus, the question is not whether Tesla can produce dramatic demonstrations. It is whether the company can convert its manufacturing advantage into reliable generalized physical work.

NVIDIA and the Robot Development Platform

NVIDIA may become strategically important to robotics even without manufacturing a commercial humanoid fleet itself. The company is building the compute and software platform beneath many robot developers.

Its physical AI stack includes:

Jetson onboard computing;

Isaac simulation and robotics frameworks; GR00T robot foundation models; Cosmos world models; Omniverse digital twins; synthetic data generation; and accelerated training infrastructure. In 2026, NVIDIA released GR00T N1.6 and later N1.7 for humanoid control and described a development workflow stretching from teleoperation-based data collection through simulation, training, evaluation and hardware deployment.

The company says GR00T 1.7 incorporates tens of thousands of hours of human demonstrations and thousands of hours of simulated experience. NVIDIA also announced an open humanoid reference platform combining a Unitree H2 Plus body, five-fingered hands, Jetson Thor compute and GR00T software.

The strategic analogy is obvious. NVIDIA is attempting to become to robotics what CUDA became to AI computing: a common development substrate.

Hands, Touch and the Manipulation Bottleneck

Human hands are extraordinary machines. They handle a steel wrench.

Then a paper cup.

Then a zipper.

Then a coin.

Then a wet towel.

Every object changes the required force, grip, geometry and feedback. This is why robotic manipulation remains difficult.

A rigid gripper can be extremely reliable when the object is standardized. A general-purpose hand has to handle objects that are:

soft;

slippery;

deformable;

transparent;

occluded;

fragile;

asymmetric;

and unpredictably oriented.

Vision alone is often insufficient. Tactile sensing tells the robot whether an object is slipping.

Force sensing constrains how hard it pushes. Joint torque sensing provides information about contact.

Palm cameras can reveal objects hidden from head-mounted cameras. Figure’s current Helix 02 demonstrations emphasize exactly this combination of tactile sensing, in-hand vision and coordinated fingers. The harder robots move into household and service tasks, the more hand intelligence becomes central.

Battery, Heat and Shift Economics

Humanoid robots are mobile computers attached to dozens of electric motors. That is an energy problem.

Walking consumes energy.

Holding a load consumes energy.

Maintaining balance consumes energy. Onboard AI compute consumes energy.

Cooling consumes energy.

Every kilogram of battery adds mass that the robot must move. This creates a difficult systems tradeoff.

Larger battery:

more runtime;

but more weight.

More powerful motors:

greater payload;

but more electricity and heat.

More onboard AI:

greater autonomy;

but more compute load.

A humanoid that operates for only a short period before charging may still be valuable in some workflows. But broad industrial adoption will depend on duty cycle. The robot has to produce enough useful minutes per shift to justify acquisition, service, charging and downtime.

MORE BATTERY
    ↓
MORE RUNTIME
    ↓
MORE MASS
    ↓
MORE MOTOR ENERGY
    ↓
MORE HEAT / STRUCTURAL LOAD

MORE COMPUTE
    ↓
BETTER PERCEPTION / AI
    ↓
MORE POWER DRAW
    ↓
LESS MARGINAL RUNTIME

THE ECONOMIC QUESTION:
USEFUL WORK PER CHARGE

Robot Data and Teleoperation

Language models can learn from enormous existing text corpora. Robots face a data shortage.

The Internet contains billions of examples of language. It contains far fewer examples of a humanoid wrist rotating a specific valve while balancing on an uneven floor.

That makes physical training data expensive. One solution is teleoperation.

A human controls or demonstrates the desired action. The robot records:

camera images;

joint positions;

forces;

hand motions;

task context;

and successful outcomes.

Those demonstrations can train policies. NVIDIA explicitly incorporates teleoperation-based collection into its GR00T development workflow.

Apptronik is building dedicated Robot Park facilities for fleet-scale data generation. Figure and other developers are similarly using real robot experience to improve their models.

Teleoperation is therefore not merely a fallback. It is part of the data factory.

Simulation and Synthetic Worlds

Robotics training cannot rely only on physical trial and error. Real robots are expensive.

Real collisions break hardware.

Real rare events are difficult to collect. Simulation solves part of the problem.

A digital twin can recreate a factory or warehouse. Thousands of simulated robots can practice in parallel.

Lighting can vary.

Object placement can vary.

Floor friction can vary.

Failures can be injected.

The resulting experience can train or test policies before they reach physical machines. NVIDIA’s Cosmos and Isaac systems are explicitly aimed at this workflow.

The challenge is the simulation-to-reality gap. A simulation is only an approximation.

Real motors have backlash.

Surfaces deform.

Objects wobble.

Sensors contain noise.

Humans behave unpredictably. The best architectures therefore combine simulation with real-world data rather than assuming one can replace the other.

Safety Standards Catch Up

Industrial robots have long operated behind cages or inside carefully controlled cells. Humanoids complicate that model because their value comes partly from sharing human spaces.

ISO published revised industrial robot safety standards ISO 10218-1 and ISO 10218-2 in 2025. These standards address industrial robot design and application integration.

But mobile bipeds introduce additional hazards. They can fall.

They depend on active stabilization. They move through space while carrying loads.

They can collide with people from multiple directions. ISO is now developing ISO 25785-1 specifically for dynamically stable industrial mobile robots, including legged and wheeled balancing systems.

As of 2026, that document is still in committee-draft development rather than final publication. ISO is also developing broader safety work for industrial mobile robots and common robotics hazards.

That is an important maturity signal. Standards bodies generally do not write detailed safety frameworks for technologies that nobody expects to deploy. But the incomplete status is equally important: the regulatory and safety framework is still catching up with the hardware.

The Economics of Replacing a Task

The robot industry often talks about replacing labor. Customers buy tasks.

A warehouse does not need a humanoid. It needs totes moved.

A factory does not need embodied AI. It needs parts loaded.

A hotel does not need a robot.

It needs rooms cleaned.

That difference is economically decisive. The correct comparison is not:

robot purchase price versus employee salary. It is total cost per useful unit of work.

That includes:

purchase or lease;

software subscription;

integration;

maintenance;

charging;

spare parts;

supervision;

teleoperation;

insurance;

downtime;

and residual human labor.

Robots-as-a-Service can change adoption because customers pay for capability rather than purchasing an experimental machine outright. Agility’s GXO and Toyota agreements show why this model is attractive.

The vendor absorbs more maintenance and technology risk. The customer evaluates whether the workflow produces value.

RESEARCH DEMO
      ↓
CONTROLLED PILOT
      ↓
CUSTOMER DEPLOYMENT
      ↓
COMMERCIAL AGREEMENT
      ↓
PRODUCTION MANUFACTURING
      ↓
MULTI-SITE OPERATING FLEET
      ↓
ECONOMIC REPEATABILITY
      ↓
SCALED INDUSTRY

THE HARD PART IS NOT
MOVING DOWN THE LADDER ONCE.
IT IS REPEATING THE RESULT.
Maturity level What it actually proves What it does not prove
Research demo A capability can be achieved under controlled conditions Reliability, cost, fleet scale
Pilot Robot can function in customer environment Long-term ROI
Commercial deployment Customer is using robot for real work Broad reproducibility across sites
RaaS / purchase agreement Customer commits economically Guaranteed profitability
Production manufacturing Vendor can build repeatable product units Mass-market demand
Operating fleet Multiple units produce recurring work over time Universal general-purpose autonomy
Scaled industry Technology is economically repeatable across customers That humanoid form wins every task

The SURVXCOM Physical AI Deployment Test

A humanoid should not be evaluated by how human it looks. It should be evaluated as an operating system in the physical world.

1. Task Value

Does the robot solve a recurring problem worth paying for?

2. Autonomy

How much of the work is truly autonomous rather than scripted, supervised or teleoperated?

3. Generalization

Can the robot handle unfamiliar object positions, environments and task variations?

4. Dexterity

Can it manipulate irregular, fragile and deformable objects reliably?

5. Mobility

Can it move safely through the actual environment where the task occurs?

6. Recovery

What happens when the grasp fails, the object moves or the planned sequence breaks?

7. Runtime

How much useful work is produced per charge and per shift?

8. Safety

Can it operate around people with predictable limits and safe failure behavior?

9. Maintainability

Can technicians service joints, hands, batteries, sensors and compute without excessive downtime?

10. Integration

Does it connect cleanly to existing manufacturing, warehouse or enterprise systems?

11. Economics

What is the total cost per unit of useful work, including service and supervision?

12. Fleet Evidence

Has the capability survived thousands of real cycles across multiple robots and sites?

The breakthrough in humanoid robotics is not when a machine can perform a human task once. It is when the machine can perform useful work repeatedly, recover from mistakes, remain safe around people and still make economic sense.

What to Watch Next

1. Atlas 2026 Deployments

Watch whether Boston Dynamics converts production Atlas shipments at Hyundai and Google DeepMind into sustained industrial work and repeat customers.

2. Figure at BMW

Watch Figure 03’s sequencing workflow for duration, throughput, intervention rate and expansion beyond controlled use cases.

3. Digit Fleet Expansion

Watch Agility’s GXO and Toyota deployments for fleet size, uptime and task diversification.

4. Apollo Commercialization

Watch Apptronik convert partnerships and capital into recurring commercial deployments rather than pilots alone.

5. Optimus External Evidence

Watch for independently verifiable commercial deployment and fleet-level throughput rather than internal demonstrations alone.

6. GR00T Adoption

Watch whether NVIDIA’s physical AI stack becomes a common robotics development platform across otherwise competing manufacturers.

7. Robot Hands

Watch tactile sensing, force control and dexterous hands for improvements in reliability, cost and service life.

8. Runtime

Watch whether new batteries, charging systems and hot-swappable architectures extend productive duty cycles.

9. Teleoperation Ratio

Watch how much human intervention remains necessary in nominally autonomous deployments.

10. ISO 25785-1

Watch the dynamically stable industrial mobile robot standard progress from committee draft toward final publication.

11. RaaS Economics

Watch robots-as-a-service pricing against human labor, conventional automation and autonomous mobile robots.

12. Home Transition

Watch whether any humanoid crosses from controlled industrial settings into genuinely unscripted residential environments at meaningful scale.

The Machine Leaves the Screen

The most consequential change in artificial intelligence may not be a smarter chatbot. It may be the moment intelligence gains hands.

That changes what AI can affect.

A model can recommend moving a box. A robot can move it.

A model can describe how to inspect a machine. A robot can walk to the machine.

A model can identify a spill.

A robot can step around it—or eventually clean it. That is why physical AI deserves to be treated as an infrastructure technology rather than a novelty.

The visible humanoid is only the surface. Underneath are semiconductor supply chains.

Batteries.

Motors.

Gearboxes.

Sensors.

AI accelerators.

Robot foundation models.

Simulation platforms.

Training-data factories.

Safety standards.

Manufacturing plants.

Field-service networks.

Insurance.

Labor economics.

And eventually law.

That is why the race will not necessarily be won by the robot with the most impressive demonstration. It will be won by the system that can manufacture the robot, teach it, operate it, repair it, insure it and improve it across a fleet.

The central question is no longer:

Can a humanoid robot do something impressive? We already know the answer is yes.

The question now is:

Can it become boring?

Can it show up every day?

Can it do useful work?

Can it fail safely?

Can it recover?

Can someone afford it?

Can someone maintain it?

Can thousands of them operate without constant engineering attention? When the answer becomes yes, physical AI stops being a robotics story.

It becomes part of the economy.

Critical Technology Hub & Reading Path

Start with the hub: SURVXCOM Critical Technology Hub. This article is part of SURVXCOM’s 30-piece cornerstone tree explaining the systems beneath technological power. Primary lane: Defense, Autonomy & Physical Systems.

Continue in the Critical Technology Stack

Across the SURVXCOM Ecosystem

Related SURVXCOM lanes: Current Signal — Timely technology shifts and current-event analysis. SURVXCOM OUTPOST — Fictional resilience, communications, formation and prepared-community applications.

Primary Research and External Sources

Source discipline: Boston Dynamics, Figure, Agility, Apptronik, Tesla and NVIDIA claims are vendor evidence and are attributed. Commercial agreements demonstrate customer commitment but not necessarily profitable scale. Figure autonomy videos demonstrate specified tasks under disclosed conditions and do not establish generalized household autonomy. Agility’s tote count is company-reported operational evidence. Atlas is described as production/manufacturing with scheduled deployments, not a broad installed fleet. Optimus is treated as an active development program rather than presumed scaled commercial deployment. ISO 10218-1/2:2025 are final standards; ISO 25785-1 is still a committee draft and ISO 26058-1 a working draft. No humanoid is presented as having solved general-purpose household autonomy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *