Humanius

If you can’t have sex with the sex-machine making machine, what even is the point?

There is a difference between human-scale and humanoid.

Human-scale just means the robot needs to fit in a space where humans should also fit, while humanoid means it is supposed to resemble a humans not just in size, but also in shape. A humanoid robot would generally have a torso, two arms, two legs, and probably a head.

As an example, a roomba fits in a human environment but is not humanoid. You could hypothetically make a humanoid robot that is capable of using an ordinary vacuum to vacuum the same space, but it would be significantly more complex and more expensive to do that. A purpose-built roomba is a much more cost-effective solution for cleaning up after humans.

Given that it’s a humanoid robot, I suspect that this is more of a marketing stunt than any practical deployment of robots.

Humanoid robots don’t make a ton of sense in manufacturing. Why mimic the sub-optimal anatomy of a human when you can make your robotic work slave have any appendage you want, which are designed to be optinal for their task along the assembly line?

Humanoid robots mostly only make sense in spaces that need to be designed for humans (like homes or hospitals) where the robot needs to regularly interact with human infrastructure.

Hypothetically the police could come with a warrant and force you to hand over the footage you recorded. It’s a higher barrier than if footage is being uploaded to the cloud, but it can still happen.

And even if the cameras are not uploading their footage to the cloud, it still wouldn’t sit well with me if every other house has a camera pointed at the public street

Where I live it is technically illegal to record the public street with an automated camera, but it’s not really being enforced. So there is Ring cameras everywhere.

Big companies using the informal you in formal communication can be seen as a way to try to make themselves feel smaller, more approachable, more person-like than they actually are.

I’m not saying that is necessarily the reason behind it, but formal or informal you do invoke different feelings and associations when they are used.

Formal you (u) shows respect, whereas informal you (jij) is more personal and buddy-buddy.

I’m also Dutch and I still occasionally use it when I want to be polite to an older person I do not know very well, or to someone who is in a position where I want to show a certain form of “respect” (higher social standing?)

That is probably also why the government uses “u” in its communication. It is proper to be seen as being respectful to your citizens. And saying “jij” after “u” is less likely to offend anyone than saying “u” after “jij”

The rules are a bit vague when you are supposed to use it, and most people will go “zeg maar jij hoor” (you can say [informal] you) after you start with “u” (formal you)

Would you think other countries are just idiots that don’t know burning garbage to generate power is better than just burying them?

Yes, and garbage incineration to generate power or other forms of energy is a thing that happens in many countries

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Waste-incineration-capacities-by-EU-MS-Medarac-et-al-2014_fig37_304917594

The green dots represent electricity-generation plants, and the red dots represent plants that are used to generate both electricity and (presumably district) heating. Figure is from a paper from 2014, which I found after a quick Google.

The greenhouse emissions problem depends on where that garbage would otherwise end up, and what would happen with it.

If the garbage would otherwise be recycled fully then incineration would seem like a worse option. But if the garbage would otherwise end up in a landfill, it leads to decomposition and methane production. Methane is one of the worst greenhouse gasses out there, so incineration might be preferable to just leaving it be.

I’m no expert whatsoever, so take my comment with a grain of salt… I may be misinformed

With that line of reasoning there is nothing the Chinese state can do that would ever get your approval.
My comment was also not in reference to China burning garbage, but your blanket statement that burning garbage isn’t eco.

I’m no fan of the CCP, but I prefer to at least engage with the point rather than automatically dismissing anything they do as bad.

From my understanding it can be done relatively cleanly with filtration, and its much better for the environment than letting it sit on a landfill generating methane

(Not an expert, so I might be incorrect)

Emoji aren’t strictly prescriptive with their meaning. They are generic symbols that can have many meanings in different contexts and cultures.

The name of an emoji is more a suggestion than anything else.

Yes, but it’ll take them another ten years

Electricity generation would suddenly also get a lot harder. Without dynamos I think the only real option becomes solar panels.

I’m no expert, but I believe this is down to the individual member states.

In my country (the NL) it is technically not allowed to film the public street with an automated camera, which effectively makes Ring and equivalents illegal to install in most places

Practically this is not really enforced though, so you see them everywhere anyway.

To my knowledge, there are designs which allow you to pop out the latch without the need for electronics.

However, if I’m reading the article correctly those wouldn’t be allowed either because in their default state they don’t have “enough room for a hand to grip behind them”. That wording alone explicitely bans flush doorhandles, and not just electronic doorhandles

Wikipedia, being a free source of information, is an incredibly important resource and a net good for humanity. But since Wikipedia is free for all they rely on donations to keep the lights on.

There are groups who would prefer it if that free access to information did not exist, or could be more easily be controlled and/or manipulated. It is in their interest to convince people not to donate to Wikipedia

I’m convinced that this “don’t donate to Wikipedia” messaging that has cropped up in recent years is a psyop, set up by these groups with the goal to starve Wikipedia of income.

Don’t fall for it. Support one of the last truly good places on the internet.

https://www.spacejam.com/1996/jam.html

Aren’t the handlebars usually below the seat on a recumbent bike?

Edit: I stand corrected. Apparently there are a bunch of recumbent bikes with high handlebars

The only way in which we will know these people are real is if they are able to draw hands perfectly

I cannot prove I didnt cheat…

Also, sorry for the fat-fingered quality.
I drew this on my phone