Brett Adcock states that Figure AI's "Helix 2" neural net provides the right technical stack for general robotics. The biggest remaining obstacle is not hardware but the immense data required to train the robot for a wide distribution of tasks. The company plans to spend nine figures on data acquisition in 2026 to solve this.

Related Insights

The primary challenge in robotics AI is the lack of real-world training data. To solve this, models are bootstrapped using a combination of learning from human lifestyle videos and extensive simulation environments. This creates a foundational model capable of initial deployment, which then generates a real-world data flywheel.

To overcome the data bottleneck in robotics, Sunday developed gloves that capture human hand movements. This allows them to train their robot's manipulation skills without needing a physical robot for teleoperation. By separating data gathering (gloves) from execution (robot), they can scale their training dataset far more efficiently than competitors who rely on robot-in-the-loop data collection methods.

The rapid progress of many LLMs was possible because they could leverage the same massive public dataset: the internet. In robotics, no such public corpus of robot interaction data exists. This “data void” means progress is tied to a company's ability to generate its own proprietary data.

Progress in robotics for household tasks is limited by a scarcity of real-world training data, not mechanical engineering. Companies are now deploying capital-intensive "in-field" teams to collect multi-modal data from inside homes, capturing the complexity of mundane human activities to train more capable robots.

For years, access to compute was the primary bottleneck in AI development. Now, as public web data is largely exhausted, the limiting factor is access to high-quality, proprietary data from enterprises and human experts. This shifts the focus from building massive infrastructure to forming data partnerships and expertise.

The future of valuable AI lies not in models trained on the abundant public internet, but in those built on scarce, proprietary data. For fields like robotics and biology, this data doesn't exist to be scraped; it must be actively created, making the data generation process itself the key competitive moat.

The adoption of powerful AI architectures like transformers in robotics was bottlenecked by data quality, not algorithmic invention. Only after data collection methods improved to capture more dexterous, high-fidelity human actions did these advanced models become effective, reversing the typical 'algorithm-first' narrative of AI progress.

Ken Goldberg quantifies the challenge: the text data used to train LLMs would take a human 100,000 years to read. Equivalent data for robot manipulation (vision-to-control signals) doesn't exist online and must be generated from scratch, explaining the slower progress in physical AI.

AI can generate art because it was trained on the internet's vast trove of images. It struggles with physical tasks like washing dishes because there is virtually no first-person video data for such actions. Solving this data-gathering problem is key to advancing robotics.

The "bitter lesson" (scale and simple models win) works for language because training data (text) aligns with the output (text). Robotics faces a critical misalignment: it's trained on passive web videos but needs to output physical actions in a 3D world. This data gap is a fundamental hurdle that pure scaling cannot solve.