Literally the first line of the article:
> With their ability to shapeshift and manipulate delicate objects, soft robots could work as medical implants, deliver drugs inside the body and help explore dangerous environments.
Literally the first line of the article:
> With their ability to shapeshift and manipulate delicate objects, soft robots could work as medical implants, deliver drugs inside the body and help explore dangerous environments.
I think to OPs point, we keep hearing that same line and I've never once seen a productionalized version of these
I'm not sure that's a big strike against it yet. Kinda the whole point of engineering in academia is to work on hard things that are far from commercialization.
The fact that a product has not yet been created from a given technology does not mean the technology or the research itself is useless, or will not turn out to be useful in the long term. You can also learn a lot from research or development that does not ultimately work out.
>>"never once seen a productionalized version of these"
YET
Just because we have not YET seen one does not mean it should not be pursued.
Examples are endless, start with: 30 years ago, no one had seen a solar panel with 25% efficiency produced for less than $1/watt. Now, it is the most economical and fastest-growing and most sustainable energy source on the planet.
That argument is simply an argument against all efforts at making progress. Perhaps rethink making it?