Similarly, when it comes to replacing humans, why are robots more anticipated than self-driving cars?

In many fields, there is a very typical binary - opposition narrative framework. One is the empowerment and collaboration framework, and the other is the substitution and plunder framework.

Under different frameworks, the two sides of things undergo a K - shaped divergence. Either they leap upwards in the narrative of collaborative symbiosis and achieve rapid commercial diffusion; or they fall downwards in the narrative of confrontation and plunder, getting caught in a long - term trust crisis and development stagnation.

How does the person playing the chess game move the pieces? What stories are the onlookers telling? And what reactions do the listeners have?

Let's wait and see how the game of embodied intelligence unfolds.

Where do the scenarios come from?

Structural pain points give rise to structural demands.

When we regard technology as a productive force, we need to consider the deep - seated structural pain points when determining the sequence of technology implementation scenarios.

The so - called structural pain points refer to systemic chronic problems deeply rooted in the economic or industrial model that cannot be solved through routine management fine - tuning. This is particularly typical in labor - intensive industries, such as repetitive labor and work - related injury risks, as well as the labor shortage in agricultural production, high - risk and high - intensity physical labor in the construction industry, and the insufficient supply of medical nursing staff.

Labor cost is the core variable affecting output. When labor is too expensive, in short supply, or unstable, the window of typical structural demand opens. And this kind of demand is a real demand generated by the market, which is unavoidable, long - term stable, and of a huge volume.

Convenience products such as household floor - cleaning robots are used to improve people's quality of life, and consumers can choose whether to buy them or not. However, humanoid robots capable of high - intensity physical labor are a must - have option for enterprises to maintain operations and preserve profit margins.

Recently, Ravin Gandhi, the CEO of investment firm Glenborn Partners and the former CEO and founder of global manufacturing company GMM Nonstick Coatings, pointed out that "in the global economy, labor is one of the largest input costs. Therefore, if you can create a humanoid robot to perform repetitive, dangerous, or ergonomically harmful tasks, you will change the cost structure at the core of the global GDP."

He pointed out that most startups solve minor frictions, while humanoid robots focus on the labor force itself. The population in developed countries is aging. Both the manufacturing and logistics industries are facing difficulties in recruiting workers. Labor costs continue to rise. The entire supply chain relies on physically strenuous work, and people are increasingly reluctant or physically unable to engage in such work for a long time.

Autonomous driving and humanoid robots have the same origin but have shown a huge divergence in public sentiment. This has been particularly obvious after the Spring Festival, and people's expectations for household humanoid robots are like those of hungry children.

The two are homologous in underlying technology. In essence, they are both embodied intelligence, relying on machine vision, sensor fusion, large - model decision - making, and execution mechanisms. However, humanoid robots have shown far greater affinity and explosive potential than autonomous driving.

Currently, the implementation scenarios of autonomous driving technology are concentrated in Robotaxi, trunk logistics and heavy - truck freight, short - distance logistics from large - scale retailer warehouses to stores, medium - and short - distance air delivery, as well as smart agriculture and heavy - industry machinery.

In contrast, the automotive and high - end manufacturing production lines are currently the core scenarios with the highest certainty and fastest progress in the commercialization of humanoid robots. In addition, their applications in handling, sorting, and loading and unloading in warehousing and logistics, as well as in smart retail services, are also accelerating. Although medical care and home care are still in the exploration stage, they are a market with great potential.

Rogers mentioned in Diffusion of Innovations that more advanced technology does not always win. Compared with the advanced level of the technology itself, the diffusion speed of technology often depends on the degree of friction with society.

One of the key factors is the compatibility of technology, which refers to the degree of consistency between an innovation and the values, past experiences, and needs of potential users. Regarding user needs, Rogers clearly pointed out that an innovation must solve the pain points that users can perceive and recognize, rather than the pain points assumed by innovators.

The deeper the pain points, the greater the willingness to pay.

When an industry is severely affected by frequent safety accidents, labor shortages, and high labor costs, as long as there is a technology that can truly replace this part of the work, the entire industry will spare no expense to embrace it without hesitation.

Don't they both replace humans?

Ultimately, both are replacing human work, are productive tools, and will ultimately trigger profound changes in the labor - force structure. However, the difference lies in their entry points.

Currently, humanoid robots are mainly implemented in scenarios with less friction with human employment, presenting the appearance of alleviating labor shortages.

Moreover, people can easily see the relative advantages of robots compared to human work, while autonomous driving is still struggling to prove its safety and reliability.

Taking Robotaxi as an example, the ride - hailing service is an important employment buffer. Due to the relatively low entry threshold, ride - hailing is regarded as an employment option, a fallback for the unemployed, or another source of part - time work. Unemployed or semi - unemployed groups, groups lacking professional skills, middle - aged re - employment groups, and transferred labor from the manufacturing or service industries are all typical sources of its labor force.

Moreover, the labor supply of ride - hailing services is highly sensitive to the macro - economy. In the face of economic cycle fluctuations, it naturally plays the role of a labor reservoir, absorbing labor in the economic downturn and releasing labor in the economic upturn.

Different from the scenarios currently focused on by humanoid robots, the labor supply pool of ride - hailing services is extremely large, and most of them are the working - age labor force. The latter enters work scenarios that people are reluctant to do or unable to do. For example, in the current introduction period, Tesla gives priority to deploying humanoid robots in boring, dirty, and dangerous positions, which are already facing difficulties in recruitment and high turnover rates.

Even within the implementation scenarios of autonomous driving technology, there are differences. Different from Robotaxi, according to data from the American Trucking Associations (ATA), North America has long faced a serious shortage of heavy - truck drivers. The high - intensity and long - distance nature of the work has led to a serious aging problem in the industry and made it unattractive to the younger generation. Therefore, the implementation of autonomous trucks in trunk logistics is to maintain the fragile supply chain and fill the gaps in positions that human drivers are reluctant to take.

In fact, the implementation scenarios of humanoid robots are more characterized by cross - industry and high versatility, existing as a general labor force. Once the hardware manufacturing cost of embodied intelligence decreases and the generalization ability improves, robots will not only fill the gaps but also directly compete with more people for positions with a better return on investment and all - weather operation ability.

Currently, many economies around the world are facing the problems of labor shortages in the manufacturing industry and an aging population. It goes without saying that the entry of humanoid robots is to fill the gaps. Autonomous driving, especially Robotaxi, is entering a labor market that is as attractive as a hot cake.

Currently, the impacts of the two on the labor - force structure are completely different. In the short term, the impact of autonomous driving seems to be greater because it is more concentrated and visible. In the long term, humanoid robots will have a wide - ranging and in - depth impact.

How do people tell stories?

Currently, in the field of Robotaxi, there is not only the narrative that "ride - hailing drivers will disappear", but also narratives such as "human drivers are high - cost elements to be eliminated", "human drivers are the source of travel safety risks", and "human drivers are reducing traffic efficiency" are even more prevalent.

"Are you challenging me?"

Obviously, these narratives are challenging human "authority". They emphasize the game and conflict between machines and humans. This inevitably triggers the panic of the driver group and negative emotions towards Robotaxi.

If there is still safety anxiety about autonomous driving among passengers, then in the ride - hailing scenario, autonomous driving is portrayed as an "invader" for the large - scale human drivers.

The narrative advantage of humanoid robots lies in that they create a sense of collaboration. "I'll help you with what you don't want to do or can't do."

When humanoid robots are positioned as assistants to help humans with heavy - physical and high - risk operations, people are more likely to regard them as advanced tools rather than threats that deprive humans of control and living space.

From a psychological perspective, people's acceptance of risks depends on whether they feel they are in control of the risks. When the control is still in human hands, the psychological acceptance is inevitably higher.

So, can we ignore the attitudes of these driver groups?

The application of autonomous driving technology in the public transportation system is an irresistible trend. The attitudes of this part of the driver group not only need to be concerned but also must be highly concerned. Technology socialization emphasizes that no disruptive technology can achieve commercial success in the laboratory. It must compromise and integrate with existing legal norms, social ethics, and interest - distribution mechanisms.

The driver group is large in number and is the core node connecting the upper and lower levels in the current urban transportation system. For autonomous driving to achieve socialization and diffusion, it means forcibly separating millions of laborers. When a technology directly challenges the basic livelihood of a large group, the social tension it triggers cannot be resolved simply by the advanced nature of the technology. If capital and technology choose a hard landing and force the progress while completely ignoring the economic demands and psychological anxiety of this group, its commercialization process will inevitably face extremely high friction costs.

Since the First Industrial Revolution, the Luddites in history have shown the world how the anxiety of machines replacing human work can be transformed into destructive behaviors against physical entities. It is reported that in cities where autonomous driving commercial tests started earlier, such as San Francisco in the United States, there have been extreme cases where the public or protesters deliberately blocked the sensors of Robotaxis with traffic cones or even directly damaged the vehicles.

Moreover, if we can understand how individual driver nodes build a huge information - flow network, their attitudes will definitely not be ignored.

In the travel market, drivers are the group that interacts most frequently with passengers. They are natural writers of word - of - mouth scores. If the driver group is full of hostility towards autonomous driving and consciously magnifies the local defects of autonomous driving in daily driver - passenger communication, this negative narrative will spread rapidly, leading the public to have deep doubts about the safety and ethics of Robotaxi, and thus significantly prolonging the acceptance period of the mass market.

The narrative framework itself is a constructed product, selectively reflecting one side of complex things and presenting it to the general public. Undoubtedly, it must cover up some other realities. However, it is indeed a powerful tool for influencing cognition and mobilizing emotions. Especially in the macro - economy and market games, we should not only see how the narrative describes the world but also how it changes the world.

Once the narrative framework arouses strong public emotions, whether the emotions are positive or negative, and whether the narrative is based on reality or fiction, this highly contagious narrative will inevitably have consequences in economic behavior.

In business competition and the capital market, competing for the right to define the narrative framework is no less important than technological competition. In the real - world structure, how should I exist? Perhaps every technology should think about this question.

This article is from the WeChat official account "Odd Fields", author: Adeli. Republished by 36Kr with permission.