In a striking critique that has sent ripples through the tech community, Rodney Brooks, a foundational figure in modern robotics, has declared that the field he helped build has strayed from its core mission. The former MIT professor and co-founder of iRobot, the company behind the Roomba vacuum cleaner, argues that contemporary robotics is overly captivated by flashy demonstrations and unrealistic promises, neglecting the hard work of creating truly useful machines.
A Pioneer's Disappointment with Modern Trajectories
Rodney Brooks is no outsider. His work at MIT's Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory and his leadership at iRobot place him at the very heart of robotics history. He played a key role in developing the Roomba, a robot that achieved something rare: it became a practical, affordable, and mass-adopted household appliance. This success, however, now fills him with concern as he observes the current direction of the industry.
Brooks contends that the field is now dominated by what he calls "demo-ware"—impressive one-off demonstrations designed for viral videos or corporate fundraising, but which have little pathway to becoming reliable, everyday products. He points to the intense focus on humanoid robots that can perform backflips or make coffee as examples. While technically marvelous, these feats often ignore the immense complexity and cost required to make such robots function safely and usefully in unstructured human environments.
The core of his argument is that robotics has become distracted by the pursuit of artificial general intelligence (AGI)—the idea of creating a machine with human-like cognitive abilities. Brooks believes this quest, which he views as a distant and uncertain goal, is diverting precious resources and talent away from solving more immediate, tangible problems where robots could have a profound impact today.
The Call for a Return to Practical Problem-Solving
Instead of chasing science fiction dreams, Brooks advocates for a return to the pragmatic engineering that led to successes like the Roomba. He emphasizes the need for robots that address specific, well-defined challenges in sectors like manufacturing, logistics, agriculture, and elder care. These machines may not be as glamorous as a dancing humanoid, but they can generate real economic value and improve quality of life.
He highlights several areas ripe for innovation:
- Warehouse and factory automation beyond simple repetitive arms.
- Agricultural robots for precise harvesting and crop monitoring.
- Assistive devices that can help an aging population with mobility and daily tasks.
For Brooks, the measure of success should not be a robot's ability to mimic a human, but its ability to perform a needed task reliably, safely, and cost-effectively. This requires deep work on integration, software robustness, and user-centric design—areas he feels are being overshadowed by the allure of AGI.
Implications for the Future of Robotics and AI
Brooks's critique extends to the broader field of artificial intelligence, which is deeply intertwined with modern robotics. He is skeptical of the hype surrounding large language models (LLMs) like ChatGPT being a direct path to embodied robot intelligence. While acknowledging their utility for language tasks, he warns against assuming they can easily translate into the physical reasoning and common sense required for a robot to navigate the real world.
His warning serves as a crucial reality check for investors, researchers, and the public. It urges a re-evaluation of priorities, encouraging a focus on incremental, practical advancements over moonshot projects with unclear timelines. The path forward, according to this pioneer, lies not in trying to build a mechanical human, but in building specialized tools that extend human capability in meaningful ways.
The robotics community is now faced with a fundamental question from one of its own architects: Will it continue down a path of spectacle, or will it recalibrate towards the patient, practical engineering that creates lasting value? The answer could define the next decade of technological progress.
