>why did they try so hard to hype it in anthropomorphic terms?
Marketing, pure and simple
People relate better to something that sounds humanesque (even though it is not) vs calling it what it is (in this case, a massively-backed (ie LLM-based) Markov Chain generator)
>How close are we to where a robot could get into a car from 2010 and drive me around?
A long way away
And here is why - driverless cars are a thing ... essentially making the car the "robot"
General-purpose robots are an amusing scifi trope, but have no practical benefit in reality
Purpose-built robots (even ones that can flex within that prupose to different applications) make far more sense (and have already been around for decades)
Genetically engineered, properly “educated”, politically controlled, and brain washed humans would be far more useful than electromechanical robots we can build any time soon. This too is a common scifi trope.
And it’s true. Industries have shown time and again that they’d rather send the work to paupers’ hands in countries without rather than automate to metals hands within.
This is precisely why nVidia is providing GPU to AI companies, and not trying to be one themselves ... loads more money to be made selling shovels to prospectors than in being a prospector
The valid use cases for blockchain are relatively few
The use cases where it gets applied are far more than the valid ones
As for NFTs ... there never was (and never will be) a valid use case - it does not matter if you "own" a digital asset (like an image): a screenshot of it is good enough for 99.99999...% of people, so why pay for the "real" thing?
Very very little, but not nothing. I've seen a few tiny deployable solar sails and a few tiny electric motors in my brief research for my video. They seem mostly experimental, to test out theories and miniaturization.
Enough to maintain your CubeSat's orbit and do a bit of pointing, but you'd need something bigger to have the propellant and power to get out of the solar system