Interesting report, thanks. How would you characterize government interest in the conference? Aside from Ted Budd's intro video, were any other government speakers or active attendees?
It should not surprise anyone that China installs more robots in its factories than the US does. The US has been deemphasizing manufacturing in favor of a service economy since the 1980s. If one compared the number of robots to the number of manufacturing facilities, how would that affect the charts? Would the differences be so drastic? I certainly am not arguing that the US made the right decision, just wondering whether the wrong data is being displayed. Furthermore, an industry with more opportunities has more opportunities to experiment.
The number reverses if you look at robot density: the US has 307 robots per 10,000 employees, compared to 166 in China. (Historically, the IFR had much higher numbers for robot density in China, but it appeared the organization was using the wrong denominator for robots, as Amelia Michael pointed out: https://ameliakmichael.substack.com/p/chinas-robot-density-is-overstated)
However, I used the total number in this post for two reasons:
1. In this piece, I was trying to capture the talking points from this conference: the total robot installations figure came up a lot more than density numbers.
2. I think the total matters quite a bit, in part because it allows for more iteration etc. and points the way toward the future.
But if someone thinks that (2) is wrong, I'd be curious to hear why.
Too many in our world lack future vision and are primarily concerned with protecting their positions/jobs/pecking order in society.
This cohort has and will always fight to slow-walk any advances that challenge that status.
Yea! to China for moving the eventual widespread adoption of robots forward.
What I find interesting is that while China is heavily pushing robot technology and deployment forward, they are also calling for their population to marry and produce more children, presumably for future workers, even though unemployment in China is supposedly quite high.
This is a real dichotomy that deserves deeper examination.
If you're going to link something in this comment section (especially something which requires a subscription to read), would you mind including a sentence or two relating how your linked piece relates to the writing above?
I too felt like there was a lack of robot demonstrations. I get to see boxing robots at CES, but all we got was a dog and they didn’t even make it flip. Need more stunts.
As someone directly impacted by the FCC restrictions on foreign-made mobile robots, I've been thinking about the rationale behind this policy and its potential consequences.
At this point, I can understand why the U.S. is taking this approach. The goal seems to be to strengthen its domestic robotics industry, and the restrictions apply to all foreign manufacturers, not just China.
But how difficult will that be?
I recently looked back at how China built its humanoid robotics supply chain over the past three decades, the competitive advantages it has accumulated, and how difficult it would be for any country to replicate or surpass that ecosystem.
china's industry ministry put a number on this on monday. more than 40,000 humanoids produced in the first half, across more than 400 models, and it expects over 100,000 for the year. did anyone at scsp get into what that does to the flywheel, when the volume's split that many ways?
The 9x installation gap says more about manufacturing than about robots. You can't build a robot industry without the factories that buy robots. Covered lists and tariffs protect the past. Cheap energy, fast permitting and letting small manufacturers automate build the future.
What robot dominance? Let’s do something different and provide more context. China, China, China!!! Russia, Russia, Russia!!! Iran, Iran, Iran!!!
What context would you like?
Interesting report, thanks. How would you characterize government interest in the conference? Aside from Ted Budd's intro video, were any other government speakers or active attendees?
* There was a panel from two congressional staffers about the current congressional actions (which I quoted from).
* There was a fireside chat with someone from the military which I did not attend.
* Someone from NIST was on the panel about standards.
I met some staffers while there, but mostly non-governmental attendees.
It should not surprise anyone that China installs more robots in its factories than the US does. The US has been deemphasizing manufacturing in favor of a service economy since the 1980s. If one compared the number of robots to the number of manufacturing facilities, how would that affect the charts? Would the differences be so drastic? I certainly am not arguing that the US made the right decision, just wondering whether the wrong data is being displayed. Furthermore, an industry with more opportunities has more opportunities to experiment.
The number reverses if you look at robot density: the US has 307 robots per 10,000 employees, compared to 166 in China. (Historically, the IFR had much higher numbers for robot density in China, but it appeared the organization was using the wrong denominator for robots, as Amelia Michael pointed out: https://ameliakmichael.substack.com/p/chinas-robot-density-is-overstated)
However, I used the total number in this post for two reasons:
1. In this piece, I was trying to capture the talking points from this conference: the total robot installations figure came up a lot more than density numbers.
2. I think the total matters quite a bit, in part because it allows for more iteration etc. and points the way toward the future.
But if someone thinks that (2) is wrong, I'd be curious to hear why.
Thanks for replying. I agree with 2) – it’s what my last sentence was trying to say.
Too many in our world lack future vision and are primarily concerned with protecting their positions/jobs/pecking order in society.
This cohort has and will always fight to slow-walk any advances that challenge that status.
Yea! to China for moving the eventual widespread adoption of robots forward.
What I find interesting is that while China is heavily pushing robot technology and deployment forward, they are also calling for their population to marry and produce more children, presumably for future workers, even though unemployment in China is supposedly quite high.
This is a real dichotomy that deserves deeper examination.
How China built its humanoid supply chain:
https://leosu2026.substack.com/p/how-china-built-its-humanoid-supply?r=8gs0kl&utm_medium=ios
If you're going to link something in this comment section (especially something which requires a subscription to read), would you mind including a sentence or two relating how your linked piece relates to the writing above?
But otherwise, thanks for reading!
Sorry about that, Kai! I've reposted my comment with more context on how my article relates to your discussion.
Also, my article is open to everyone now.
Thanks again for sharing your insights in this piece!
I too felt like there was a lack of robot demonstrations. I get to see boxing robots at CES, but all we got was a dog and they didn’t even make it flip. Need more stunts.
As someone directly impacted by the FCC restrictions on foreign-made mobile robots, I've been thinking about the rationale behind this policy and its potential consequences.
At this point, I can understand why the U.S. is taking this approach. The goal seems to be to strengthen its domestic robotics industry, and the restrictions apply to all foreign manufacturers, not just China.
But how difficult will that be?
I recently looked back at how China built its humanoid robotics supply chain over the past three decades, the competitive advantages it has accumulated, and how difficult it would be for any country to replicate or surpass that ecosystem.
I shared my analysis in this article: https://leosu2026.substack.com/p/how-china-built-its-humanoid-supply?r=8gs0kl&utm_campaign=post-expanded-share&utm_medium=web
china's industry ministry put a number on this on monday. more than 40,000 humanoids produced in the first half, across more than 400 models, and it expects over 100,000 for the year. did anyone at scsp get into what that does to the flywheel, when the volume's split that many ways?
"-without alienating allies."
A day late and a dollar short on that one I would wager (as a Canadian).
The 9x installation gap says more about manufacturing than about robots. You can't build a robot industry without the factories that buy robots. Covered lists and tariffs protect the past. Cheap energy, fast permitting and letting small manufacturers automate build the future.