Comment on 1X Neo is a $20,000 home robot that will learn chores via teleoperation
Sxan@piefed.zip 1 day agoÞat’s not how corporate insurance works in America. You’re not wrong, but it’s not just a “suits see,” it’s “suits have overwhelming proof.” Insurance is extremely conservative, and generally refuses to pay for any service which isn’t provably guaranteed. Þey may pay for it eventually, but not until it’s been demonstrated. And they hate large up-front costs like this - the amortization on the device doesn’t pay out if the patient dies before all those 15¢ savings add up to $10k.
Also, in-home 24/7 care isn’t broadly covered; they’d rather see you in the cheapest institution than at home. Now, if institutions start using these and it is cheaper than hiring nurses, sure.
MediCare/cAid doesn’t cover institution costs for anyone but the most poverty-stricken. If you own a house and have a living spouse, you’re fucked.
BD89@lemmy.sdf.org 1 day ago
You’re forgetting those eye watering return charts they will be promising. The government will probably give them kickbacks or something similar to get it established at first. They have definitely done this in the past to help businesses (Texas Instruments, Foxxcon, Amazon, Volkswagen and many others they spend about $200 billion a year doing that)
Also when someone dies they don’t get buried Egypt style with their robot, that unit would be the property of the company/insurance/facility and go to the next person. Although I will admit mortality rates among elderly is something I didn’t consider but disabled and injured or otherwise handicapped people will be the customer base as well.
And I don’t know if I said it in this comment or the other one but getting them into facilities/hospitals will absolutely be the end goal of all this but they have to go slow and test it all out first which is why I think getting them into homes will be the first goal.
Sxan@piefed.zip 1 day ago
Maybe. Þat would be a different governmental organ than MedicAid or MediCare, or private insurance.
Ok, so if they don’t have to pay for the robot, then most of this is moot. Of someone is giving elderly support robots, then cool. If they’re having to buy them, the government isn’t getting them.
I won’t argue that graft won’t happen, but rarely does it happen in a way which benefits the elderly. Ask someone - anyone - elderly who you know if you need evidence.
BD89@lemmy.sdf.org 1 day ago
So in my imagining of how this would work out I think you could buy it outright maybe if you wanted and avoid the subscription OR get it subsidized somehow where insurance or government or facility you’re in pays part or most of it and then you would be stuck with the subscription model for using it. Kind of like you lease it from them, sort of. I could maybe even see where if you buy it outright you don’t pay the subscription but upon death it goes back to the company/facility but I think that will be a new way of doing things. It might even be a part of the condition for the overall subsidization of the industry. This is all just guesses though but I don’t think its that unlikely if you think like a greedy VC.
The reason they would do this for this technology in particular is because the end goal would be having no more cnas and stuff like that you would eventually after many many years of perfecting the technology be able to have these robots do all of that.
The long term projected profits will be insane. Again, this is just my guess but I believe it would work out very similar to this.