🧊 From Fridges to Bots: What the Adoption Curve of Refrigerators Tells Us About the Future of Household Robots

“Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a luxury—until it’s not.”

In the early 1920s, if you wanted a refrigerator, you were part of the elite. The first electric fridges—bulky, loud, and experimental—cost the equivalent of $7,000 to $15,000 in today’s dollars. They were marvels of innovation but inaccessible to all but the wealthiest households.

Fast forward to today: 99.8% of U.S. households own a refrigerator. They’re so commonplace that we hardly think about them—until they break.

Now imagine we’re at the beginning of the same curve, not for food storage, but for household robots.


📈 Historical Tech Adoption: The Refrigerator Curve

Take a moment to explore this interactive chart from Our World in Data. It tracks the adoption of various home technologies—from refrigerators to microwaves to dishwashers—across the 20th century.

Here’s what the refrigerator’s rise looked like:

  • 1920s–30s: Early adopters only; ~10% of households
  • 1940s: Over 50% adoption, thanks to Freon technology and mass production
  • 1950s: Ownership skyrockets past 80% after WWII
  • By 1960: Nearly universal in U.S. homes

In roughly 30–40 years, refrigerators went from a rich man’s curiosity to a household necessity. Price dropped. Reliability improved. Social expectations shifted.


🤖 Robot Labor Is on the Same Curve

Elon Musk has claimed that every household will eventually have a humanoid robot—a general-purpose machine that can walk, see, understand commands, and perform physical labor. His company Tesla is building “Optimus,” a robot intended to work in factories first, then homes.

This might sound futuristic. But so did refrigerators once.

Currently:

  • A robot costs $20,000–$100,000
  • Only companies or the ultra-wealthy can afford one
  • Reliability is limited, and functionality is narrow

But if history is a guide, we might see a similar trajectory:

YearPhaseApproximate Robot Cost
2025Early adopters only$20k–$100k
2035Middle-class adoption begins$5k–$15k
2045Widespread, household norm<$3k

Just as refrigerators eliminated the need for daily ice deliveries and manual food preservation, robots could eventually eliminate repetitive home labor—cleaning, organizing, even assisting the elderly.


🌍 The Inequality Question

Of course, global access will vary. In the U.S., even $1,000 robot labor might feel cheap. But in parts of India or sub-Saharan Africa, it could be out of reach for decades without intervention—just as electricity and refrigerators took far longer to reach the developing world.

This raises critical questions for post-labor economics:

  • Will robots become tools of empowerment—or deepen the divide?
  • Who will own the robots—individuals, corporations, or governments?
  • Should we envision public “robot libraries” like we once had rural electrification programs?

🔁 The Past is Prologue

When we think about technological change, it’s tempting to view each new device as unprecedented. But the story of household refrigerators shows a clear pattern: steep initial cost, followed by mass adoption and ubiquity.

Robots may follow the same arc. And if they do, the fridge might just be their closest ancestor—not in function, but in social and economic impact.


Explore the data here:
📊 Our World in Data – Technology Adoption Chart

Elon Musk’s Vision Still Matters for Tesla

On a recent episode of the Sanity Podcast, hosts Dave Briggs and Allison Camarada sat down with Ross Gerber, an early Tesla investor who once held nearly 500,000 shares. Gerber’s take? Elon Musk’s political stances, his Twitter antics, and his role in slashing government spending via DOGE have turned Tesla into a “pariah brand,” tanking its stock and alienating owners. He’s sold off much of his stake and wants Musk out as CEO, pointing to a board he claims is overpaid in stock options and lacks independence. As a Tesla shareholder who’s voted twice to back Musk’s compensation, I’ve got a different view—one that sees Gerber’s complaints as shortsighted and the hate for Tesla as misplaced. Here’s why Musk’s vision still matters, and why Tesla wouldn’t be Tesla without him.

Stock Options Align Incentives, Not Greed

Gerber griped about Tesla’s board getting rich off stock options instead of flat pay—$600 million for chair Robyn Denholm, he says, versus the $400k norm at companies like Disney. But isn’t that the same deal Musk has? Back in 2018, when Tesla was a $50 billion company, shareholders like me voted for his pay package: for every $50 billion in value he added, up to $650 billion, he’d get a payout. The media called it absurd, saying Tesla would never hit that mark. Guess what? It did, and then some—12xing my investment. We voted again in 2024 to reaffirm it, with 75% approval. So why’s Gerber mad when the same stock-based incentives that rewarded Musk also rewarded him 20-fold? The board and Musk win when shareholders win—when Tesla provides value to the world. That’s not a flaw; it’s the point. The only ones whining are Gerber and an activist lawyer pushing a BS lawsuit with a guy who owns nine shares. Most of us aren’t mad—we’re counting our gains.

Tesla’s Success Isn’t Luck—It’s Elon

Gerber wants Musk gone, but look at the alternatives. Ford’s stock has been stuck at $9 since 1989. GM went bankrupt in 2008, wiping out shareholders like me (I lost $100—not much, but still). Meanwhile, Tesla’s the only new U.S. car company to thrive in a century. Why? Musk’s vision. He’s not just churning out cars—he’s pushing grid-scale Megapack batteries, humanoid robots, and electric semis. New EV players like Fisker and Canoo crashed and burned; Tesla didn’t. People think CEOs micromanage daily ops, but that’s not the gig. A CEO makes a few big calls a year to set the course. Compare Musk to GM’s Mary Barra—stock flat since their bankruptcy—or Ford’s latest CEO, whoever that is. Musk sees where tech and the world are headed; they don’t. Without him, Tesla might coast for 10-15 years on Model Ys and 3s, but the visionary spark would die.

Apple’s Lesson: Visionaries Matter

Take Apple. People see it as a juggernaut now, but in 1998, it was nearly bankrupt. They’d kicked Steve Jobs out in 1985, and for over a decade, the company floundered—until they brought him back in 1997. Jobs turned it around with the iPod, iPhone, and more, making Apple a titan. Since his death, though? They’ve coasted—new iPhones, sure, but nothing revolutionary. Tesla could follow that path if Musk were axed: profitable for a while, but stagnant, no longer dreaming big. Gerber might not care, but I do—because that’s where the real value lies.

The Hate’s Misplaced—And It Hurts the Wrong People

Yes, Musk’s dive into politics stings for Tesla owners. I get it—nobody likes being hassled for driving one. But the pain isn’t from Elon; it’s from people attacking us for his views. I don’t see folks boycotting Amazon over Jeff Bezos, or GM over Barra. Why Tesla? Gerber notes Musk owns just 13% of the company—87% is us: shareholders, pension funds, workers. Protests at Tesla stores, keying cars—that doesn’t hit Elon; it hits regular people. Tesla owners now have to worry their cars will be vandalized every time they go oujust because they drive a Tesla. It’s unfair, and it’s missing the point: Tesla’s still fighting climate change, even if Musk’s tweets rile up the culture wars.

Musk’s Not Perfect, But He’s Proven His Worth

Is Musk distracting? Sure, sometimes. Twitter was a wild move, and his Trump endorsement after the assassination attempt raised eyebrows. But Gerber’s wrong that it’s all downhill. Musk’s quirks—political or otherwise—come with the genius. He took Tesla from a cash-strapped EV geek dream to a global force. When Biden snubbed Tesla for GM and Ford in that EV summit, Musk fought for the credit he’d earned—because he built the industry they’re now riding. And DOGE? If it’s slashing waste, I’m not crying over it—especially when Gerber admits the SEC’s understaffed anyway. Musk’s not “taking his eye off the ball”; he’s juggling more balls than most CEOs could dream of.

The Bottom Line

Gerber’s selling because he’s cashed out his 20x gains and doesn’t like Musk’s vibe anymore. Fine (we, other Tesla Shareholders, don’t like him! Go start your own company Ross!)—he’s free to buy Ford or GM instead. But for me, and plenty of other shareholders, Musk’s the reason Tesla’s not just another failed startup—or a coasting has-been like Apple post-Jobs. The stock’s down 40% from its peak, sure, but it’s still worth more than Ford, GM, and Stellantis combined. BYD’s cheaper cars don’t touch Tesla’s software edge, and robo-taxis? Good luck finding a better bet. Tesla’s not dying—it’s evolving, and Musk’s the one steering it. If you don’t like it, nobody’s forcing you to buy the stock—or the car. Me? I’m still in, because vision beats complacency every time.

Tesla – Next Opportunities 2025 and 2026

I am a big believer in the future of Tesla as a business and the positive impacts they will have on the world.I wanted to put together a quick reference for the catalysts I see coming in the next 2 years that I can quickly share with people. 

These are ordered from first to happen to furthest away. 

Tesla Model Y Juniper Update

New Cheaper Tesla car/vehicles for sale – H1 2025

China megapack factory 

Semi production next year

FSD release in China imminent

Robotaxi service – start in Texas and California next year

Optimus bot

Tesla Model Y Juniper Update – This is a styling and hardware update for the best selling car in the world in 2023, the Tesla Model Y SUV. It wasn’t quite the best selling in 2024, likely due to people waiting for the 2025 update. This update should lead to best selling status of this car again and help total production of 2.3 million vehicles in 2024. 

New Cheaper Tesla car/vehicles for sale – H1 2025 – Elon has mentioned veiled comments related to cheaper vehicles in H1 2025. These will be able to be built on the same lines as Model 3 and Y. This should help total production of 2.3 million vehicles in 2024. 

Tesla model Q?

China megapack factory – The Megapack is a “grid scale” battery storage solution for energy. These are sold often in sits of 200-500 at at time. They cost around $1 million per megapack. The current factory is in the USA, for the USA and rest of world. The China Megapack factory should be in production in H1 2025 and fully ramped by end 2025. These are extremely profitable products. 

Megapack factory 60% complete – sept 2024

Semi production next year – Tesla has been testing the Tesla Semi for a while with Pepsi and other companies. The Tesla semi will be much cheaper to operate and more reliable (fewer parts) than a diesel semi. I fully expect electric semi’s to almost completely replace all semi’s in 10 years. The average semi is 7 years old. That means every 7 years most of the semi fleet is fully replaced. Of course there are some older vehicles that remain. Since electric semi’s will be cheaper to operate and trucking is a business large businesses will drive adoption of this more efficient technology, or they will go out of of business and be replaced by companies that do.
Tesla semi has driven 250,000 miles 

Tesla Semi partner PepsiCo says electric truck helps with driver retention

Tesla semi factory videos 

FSD release in China imminent – Up until now, FSD (Full Self Driving) A $8,000 option, or $100/month subscription, has only been available in the USA. Tesla is likely to get approval to start using and selling in EU and China in 2025. This will open up for millions of drivers to pay for that software. 

Robotaxi – start in Texas and California 2025 – Tesla has had good progress on its FSD (Full Self Driving) software in the last year. They are planning to start offering a Robotaxi service, using Tesla 3’s and Y’s in California and Texas in 2025. 

Tesla Eyes 2025 Robotaxi Launch in California and Texas

Tesla robotaxis are coming in 2025 with an unexpected addition

Optimus bot – Tesla has been working on the Optimus, humanoid Robot, for a few years now. The latest versions are very compelling, being able to walk down a steep slippery slope and catch a thrown ball. These will be offered to do simple work in factories. They don’t need to do 100% of the work people can do. There is a curve of simple tasks they can start on and slowly develop skills and do more and more. Even if they cost $50k a year, they will be cheaper than a fully burdened factory worker who after factoring in health care, sick time, etc costs a company more than $50k a year, even if they are only paid $30k /year. Tesla could likely lease these for “only” $25k/year and even replace half a person. 

Tesla’s Optimus can now walk autonomously on rough terrain

Tesla Optimus Robot Catching a Ball