I agree with your entire comment except the end.

I'm not sure the US has the greatest track record when it comes to those sorts of occupational wars, realistically. I think the only times we've ever really seen it turn out well is maybe in vietnam, where we actively just like, lost the entire war and got sent packing, and they're still having to deal with the ongoing problem of their country being contaminated by chemical incendiary weapons that produce larger percentages of birth defects. So, even given that Saudi Arabia is kind of a theocratic monarchic shithole, I dunno if us overthrowing it would realistically do any good, you know? I dunno. I'd probably need to see more on the numbers of dissent amount the saudi population. I think probably capitalizing on a popular movement for regime change, much like the arab spring, would probably be the best route if that was possible, and it would probably have to be more grassroots than something that the US might intentionally attempt to foment in the population, I'd imagine.

In totality though I'm not really sure to what extent it's in the US's best interest to destabilize saudi arabia. I think the US would probably prefer predictable fascists compared to, say, if they decided to rapidly nationalize and democratize their oil supply. Another, relatively understated, good reason to move away from petroleum, I would say.

Damn we're just posting boomer comics now huh

Will these exercises work on the butthole as well? asking for a friend asking for a friend

You know, it really makes it feel like those comments are particularly useless when, just by having used the website for a long enough time, you can imagine them simply by the scars they have branded onto your thinking goo. It becomes totally redundant at that point, totally useless, even worse than it having contributed nothing but empty space in the first place, it now occupies empty space in the brain. It's like old farts constantly remembering and bantering about ad jingles from their youth, it fills me with dread.

Okay guys be honest for a second with me here do you think his hair transplant was like the single most effective thing he's done for his own public image? I think it might be. If you look at the before and after pictures that motherfucker is super bald at a young age, but just deluded enough to not have shaven his head. If you look at him now and sort of at his height in public good will with teslas and what have you, bang, full head of hair. Did it give him more confidence to spiral from a minor silicon valley douche into a full turbodouche? Or did it just masquerade the true baldness of the soul with which he is plagued? I dunno. Nobody holds any good sentiments about jeff bezos, and that man looks like a shorter lex luthor. I mean everyone also things zuck is a lizard man or a robot or whatever, and he has hair I guess, but I dunno.

Am I reading too much into his former baldness?

IS veganism the real solution here, or is the real solution the all-artificial, all-synthetic diet? Me personally, I'm going to down this jug of red 40, and then I think I'll get back to you

Okay somebody probably knows better than me, but what is the advantage of humanoid robots? Why are people kinda, on this, now? It feels very 20th century, as an idea. It's pretty cool, but I don't understand why this would be necessary compared to just like, specialized normal robots that do specialized normal tasks. It seems more efficient, if you wanted a robot to, say, do the dishes, to make a robot that just does the dishes, instead of making a robot in the shape of a person that does the dishes. The one that's in the shape of a person is maybe more broadly applicable to human contexts, software notwithstanding (which does seem like a major hiccup). But it's not as though there's like, an upper limit on the amount of robots which we can have, in total. You could just make more robots, and make them specialized for certain tasks, like stocking shelves or whatever, and that would probably be easier, I would think, than making one robot to rule them all. Like, one robot, with ostensibly an on-board computer and on-board batteries so it's as universal as possible.

It gives me self-driving car vibes, where we could've had them in the 50's if everyone was willing to install metal spikes in the ground every however many feet ahead, but then that maybe doesn't make any sense, because it's just kind of a shitty train or tram. Basically, that nobody's willing to front the cost of infrastructure for anything anymore, so we have to make like, a universal device, and end up quintupling the total cost while making a solution that is either less efficient or doesn't exist.

Also, what's the point of the legs? Is it supposed to go outside, or go up stairs better? We already have pretty efficient wheeled vehicles capable of doing that in most public spaces, or, we're supposed to, anyways, they're called wheelchairs. What do we need this guy to walk around for?

Edit: So far, what I've gotten is ladders, and the scalability of a humanoid design vs other kinds of designs.

For ladders, I think you could probably tackle that with a similar set of constraints what you might need for a stair climbing robot, maybe just with a couple heavyweight anchors inside of it and some gearing or something. Use the robot's big arms, the manipulators, to climb like normal, and then use the bottom wheels to sort of ratchet the robot up. Probably that could work on most ladders with some clever engineering. Could maybe also run a cable from the top of the ladder to the bottom and then have a system where the robot rappels up and down for lots of ladders, but yeah.

I don't think you end up spending all that much on a robot that has wheels vs legs, and I think probably the increased efficiency would be worth it if you want like a generalized robot here. Might be wrong, maybe a roboticist can tell me no, but I dunno. As far as engineering goes it doesn't seem any more complicated than legs. Legs seem better for, offroading, basically. Which are why lots of animals use them, cause animals don't have roads.

For the versatility and scalability thing, I dunno whether or not it's more or less efficient still. While a steam cleaning room does require some amount of consideration to build, I would think that you could really get the price down from the tens of thousands of dollars required for this kind of robot to perform a similar job. Especially if you built it that way up front, retrofits might be much more expensive considering how many bathrooms aren't built correctly. Or you could go with a kind of hybrid approach, which I totally forgot about, but would seem to make some amount of sense, especially for a larger building.

Maybe those savings build up over time, and you could just have a McDonald's staffed by like three of these at once and only spend like 500,000 on it, which does seem like quite a bit to add on top of a McDonald's opening costs. I'm assuming you gotta buy multiple to staff it as a whole and also that you have to buy multiple to have more battery capacity, but maybe one of these will come out with the clever innovation of a swappable battery if/when they come to market. I would definitely hope that'd be the case.

I'm not sure it works out economically. I'm not sure of anything here. These are just suggestions because I haven't seen a lot of FUD on these human robots, except of the Terminator variety, which seems dumb.

I suppose my biggest difference here is just one of philosophy, mostly because I've seen it reflected in self-driving cars. You can make something that's capable in any context. Wind, snow, rain, shine, heavy traffic, pedestrian traffic, intermodal traffic, different kinds of roads not created to a set standard by the state's DOT. You can make a Swiss army knife, right. Maybe there are some economic and QoL savings there if you can do rideshares or do like, johnnycabs, right, if you can eliminate the desire for car ownership and status from the American mind. Maybe you can get all those cars out of parking lots as much as possible, and onto the road, doubling, maybe even tripling the amount of traffic as cars now move from one person going from one place to another place. Maybe you can also solve traffic, if you can get all the human driven cars off the road and totally automate everything so none of the cars ever hit each other or anyone, maybe you could try to do this piecemeal with autonomous vehicle only zones and surmount the nimbys with venture capital to buy a whole local municipality. Maybe you can balance the speed with the safety so we don't have heavy traffic and we get places on time, but when a disaster strikes from ice buildup on the road in a random place, or leaves flying around your car, it doesn't kill everyone. Maybe, you can get all this to not computationally require an energy cost collectively that rivals a medium sized European country. Maybe you can also solve the wireless communication issues that would plague this system, and maybe that allows you to simplify it instead of having every car be self-driving and predictable even though probably a bunch of different companies will be trying to get in on this and will be mingling in traffic, with different softwares.

Maybe you could also make a tram, though. Maybe you could have an electric folding bike you take on the tram. That's also an option. That's just infrastructural cost, and we could do that right now.

Neither of these solutions is necessarily better, right. I mean, in this case specifically it's pretty apparent to anyone with half a brain that the trams are better quite obviously but like, as an analogue about humanoid robots, especially with the point taken about a variety of contexts as opposed to a single high friction context like cars, neither of these solutions are necessarily better. They entail different philosophies. One created a world around the thing, one creates the thing. One changes the world to suit the people, one changes the people to suit the world.

Is what I'm saying making sense, did I get my point across?

I wanted to get like, a weighted jacket, so I could take it off and throw it on the ground and have it make a thud, like I'm piccolo, or rock lee, right, and maybe get jacked at the same time, but apparently it costs like 200 bucks for one. So that sucks.

Edit: Also, none of them taper at the waist, which I feel like would be a good idea since that would more evenly distribute the weight on your hips instead of just on your shoulders.

You know so for this specific instance I kind of find it to be, dumb, right, really stupid, but obviously this guy is trolling, and I think in this thread I've even seen an .exe that someone compiled get posted, so I guess, good things come to those who shitpost and bitch, or whatever.

Also glad this post is (hopefully) dead, so I can write my reflections that nobody else is gonna realistically read.

More broadly, though, I've seen a lot of technically minded linux using system admin types, nerds, basically, right, that just kind of shit relentlessly on anyone who doesn't know as much as them. Which sucks, for sure, it's really annoying. It gives me the same vibe as when people talk about how everyone who moves to their country should speak the language, and understand every facet of the culture and every custom, because they're a "guest". I mean, yeah, sure, that's partially true I suppose, and certainly it would help if that were the case, to smooth the transition, right, but it's also really stupid to expect everyone to acclimate immediately. There are external factors that drive someone to settle in a country, right, could be asylum, could be, socioeconomic asylum. Those are your two options, basically. It's not really like these people don't give anything back, either, since they provide high amounts of economic value, they import their culture which can be beneficial, shit like that. It would just straight up make more sense to accommodate them more, to be nicer to them, because it would make it easier for them to acclimate. You will statistically have better outcomes if you choose that path, compared to just kind of, holding your nose up at them, and demanding everything from them and giving nothing in return.

Not the best metaphor, I'll admit, comparing a country to the collection of people who might be thought of as "tech literate", right, obviously it's apples to oranges. Nonetheless, I've seen a very kind of, elitist attitude, directed towards new people, from a group of people that should welcome anyone who seeks to understand their technology better, anyone who seeks more tech literacy. I dunno, I just feel like I've seen enough "well justified" stack overflow asshole responses that are like "uhhh I GUESS I'll tell you about this but you should've googled it" when google was what brought up the thread. Maybe that's more on google, though, I dunno. It gives me redditor vibes, like, NTA reddit vibes, where people kind of take any morally righteous position they can, in order to justify them acting like a twatsack.

It's also, practically, a strange mentality to take, because none of this is really going to prevent or discourage people from making stupid comments, right. Gatekeeping is the fucking stupidest idea I've ever really heard from the internet, because it just doesn't work. It just creates people who want to spit back at you, and that's obviously going to work itself into a kind of positive feedback loop where you're going to get flooded with more shit in return. It is energy that would be better spent making more accessible software, if such a thing is possible in these circumstances.

I dunno, at large, it is kind of these mentalities that make me think, it's not really any wonder why FOSS software, despite being more naturally suited to computer architecture, compared to other shit, isn't really as used as it should be. It's mostly just a practical concern, for people. If people have to put in 30 minutes to learn something, then that's half an hour, and if they're getting paid federal minimum wage in the states, you could charge them like three bucks and it would probably be worth their time. It's against the ideal, right, to charge for it, obviously it's not really going to be a guaranteed ROI, also you're maybe going to see a smaller userbase, because lots of people would rather pay free than cheap by a staggering proportion, and also you really can't charge for it, and still have your software remain open source, lest someone else just copies it and spreads it.

So that all sucks, in practical terms, but sort of my broader point is that the ideological position of FOSS basically can't compete with your stupid free market charge for money for software kind of shit. We get windows, we get mac, because the software, and the philosophies that built them, were more naturally suited to the socioeconomic environment they all propagated in. They are "more practical", both in terms of your end user's uses, but also in terms of how they spread. It's cynical. It is our old friend of naive techno-optimism, rearing it's ugly head once again. It also makes me think, you know, that what entails FOSS, are philosophical positions that are naturally kind of more suited to a smaller developer, that can't build in anti-crack measures, or realistically charge anonymous internet denizens for copyright infringement, and thus, can't really charge money for software, especially from what's already going to be an extremely limited userbase. It's also to their advantage to maybe try to seek help from their limited install base and bolster their numbers that way. I dunno. It strikes me the same way as non-cyberspace attempts at anarchism, right, where it just doesn't, as quickly, as cynically, secure the means of resistance, and ends up constantly getting crushed by larger predators of ideology.

I dunno man, I just wish people would stop being mean to each other on the internet. Causes me too much psychic damage.

"Scooby-Doo doesn't have Scooby-Doo" is like saying that my PB & J sandy has neither PB, nor J, nor is it a sandy. Like, what are we saying, at this point? It's obviously not even the same thing, it's like, a bean bag chair, or whatever else. At the same time, I don't find myself crying for how the symbol has been dissolved, because that shit is happening all the time and only iron law of reality is that everything changes eventually.

I dunno I get it but at the same time the shit strikes me as dumb and every time I hear somebody complain about this shit I get flashbacks to 4chan and also real life where I'm gonna be like "yeah sure that's kinda stupid, scooby doo should have scooby doo or whatever" and then somebody's gonna take that as an opportunity to start extrapolating a bunch of shit about how postmodernism is ruining the culture and yadda yadda white genocide, and I'm like. Damn, I thought we were gonna talk about scooby doo.

This guy got that ohio skibidi rizz.

You know it's interesting how in touch I am considering how out of touch I am. I want to be a part of the cultural zeitgeist so I can get jokes, and talk to people, and generally be alive and understand what's going on in the world, but at the same time it's truly exhausting. I dunno, I think as I've understood how much "the culture" is just pioneered by like, some 12 year old somewhere brainlessly chaining nonsense words together, the more I find myself wanting to disengage. See, and then, that's not even real, because "the culture" no longer exists. You get viral memes that are spewed forth on their ability to masquerade as "the culture" without actually being it. I'm sure some stupid kid somewhere talks like they're a terminally online brainrotted weirdo, and that kid should probably stop being on the internet, but to say that this stupid kid is "the culture", is false. This isn't the case.

Everyone just collectively hallucinates some fake thing in their head that they can be mad or find funny or both. There is no "culture" anymore. There's just a bunch of atomized communities who independently do whatever they do, and then somehow everyone has cultural osmosis knowledge of a mr beast video because they know someone who knows someone who watches it and they have to have an opinion on everything. I want the ride to stop, I want to get off! I want the ride to stop now! I would like to go back to rage comics please!