top 97 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 213 points 2 months ago (10 children)

The rich lack the empathy to care that you can't "afford" something. They think everything is a choice. The homeless chose to be homeless as much as they chose to be rich. Fucking delusional evil people!

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 76 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    We are the collection of all of “our” choices.

    Even the ones we made before we were born by people we’ll never meet lol

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 40 points 2 months ago* (2 children)

    They genuinely believe their familial history and it being the reason they’re rich or privileged enough to become wealthy is their own doing, that they actively participated in creating that opportunity and they’ll call themselves a rags to riches success story for investing a small inheritance or loan of a million dollars into hundreds of millions, saying it was all grind and sheer willpower. They think everyone who didn’t do that is dumber than they are, and then they’ll tell you all about their neat ideas on how scientists and experts are wrong and how all their boys at the private country club told them the real truth about health and economics and women and the poor and anyone who doesn’t believe it is a sucker and deserves it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 45 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    It's funny how the most valid part of Christianity, that rich people are the most evil, is the part modern "Christians" reject the most.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Well, very few people like to be told they’re the villain…

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 162 points 2 months ago (14 children)

    Aside from the affordability thing...

    Do rich people think we make each others beds? Tuck each other in for the night?

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 97 points 2 months ago (7 children)
  • [–] 65 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    Normalize tucking in the homies and kissing them goodnight.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Did you even think this through?

    If I tuck them in, they will have to get out of bed to tuck me in. It’s going to create and endless cycle where we are up all night kissing each other.

    A better solution is to simply share the same bed and kiss in it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    They think homeowners have roommates to get labor from them. The same way they have servants who cook and clean for them. To them, the idea of not being able to afford housing is literally inconceivable. It’s not even on their radar, because they’ve never had to worry about it before. The only reasons they can think that someone would have a roommate is for convenience.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    Oh man, my cousin had a classmate that was shocked and confused when she learned that not everyone had, or could afford, a yacht. To her, that was just something everyone had, because they weren’t that expensive.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 138 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    Rich people think roommates are servants

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    If the purpose of a roommate was to make your bed for you, wouldn't that just make a roommate ouroboros where you each make each other's beds? After all, you are your roommate's roommate...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago

    Not in rich world.

    In rich world there is a title difference between property owner and roommate. These are not equals, but a superior and subservient class.

    A property owner provides housing and charges the roommate money and/or labor for the privilege of living on the property. Why take on a roommate if free labor is available?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 54 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Wait, were roommates supposed to be making our beds?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 42 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    I refuse to believe that there's a bipedal robot that can make my bed, with out ridiculous specific programming.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    There is, it is just controlled by a human operator. XD

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    Is there video evidence of one of these robots making a bed? I don't even care if it's fully cherry-picked; I'd be impressed just to see it happen mechanically. Tucking the fitted sheet around the corners is not a simple task.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 39 points 2 months ago (8 children)

    Does the robot pay the rent?

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

    No it costs $20,000. Then costs $400/month for the premium Roommate plan. $50 for the AI-compatible sheets only washable by your CoMpAny-ApProVeD washing machine.

    Also you pay with your private data

    Warning: Robot not responsible for any damaged goods, or murdered humans.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    For that much I better be able to fuck it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 2 months ago* (5 children)

    Let me translate this thought process from rich asshole to regular human:

    • People need roommates because they cannot afford to live on their own.
    • The reason they cannot afford to live on their own is because they aren't working enough hours (to make him more money.
    • The reason they aren't working enough hours is because they have to spend too much time engaged in activities that aren't work.
    • A robot frees them of having to do things that aren't work.
    • Thefore a domestic robot will make his workers do more work and achieve their purpose of working and paying all their bills.
  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    They just forgot the part where the people that need roommates don't have money to buy a robot, or pay the subscription for the robot, or the "don't kill me in my sleep" premium upgrade for said robot subscription.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago*

    Well you see, if we increase costs to a point where you need to work 100+ hours a week just to survive then you'll have to buy the robot just to do it.

    The model is probably that you have to rent or finance the robot or something so that it just costs you productivity instead of a big up-front cost.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 30 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Instead of sharing rent with a roommate, people will now not want to save money and actually pay more by purchasing a robot.

    🤡🤡🤡🤡

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 28 points 2 months ago (9 children)

    Aren't those types of robots mostly remotely controlled?

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    In most demos, yes. Though they have managed to do things that vaguely seem correct, in very specific tasks in very controlled environments and often showing a behavior you wouldn't want.

    Like for example, they got it trained to pull out a dish rack and put a dish in, and push the rack back in. Then a human pulls out the rack and the robot pushes it back in. Which they like to show as it responding to the environment, but in real life the human wanted to do something with the rack, why would the robot incessantly keeping it from being out be desired?

    Another one where it could pick up clothes, so long as the clothes were within a set square meter and the background was solid white.

    The remote control is the mechanism to try to train them to work independently, but it is a tall order. To get the relatively more straightforward movement of operating a car, they took millions of miles of data to feed it. These robots are aiming for far more intricate work and have a severe lack of access to training data.

    Further, imagine any task that becomes very difficult just by putting on gloves. Congratulations, there's a task machine learning can't help with, because they don't have tactile in the input loop.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    These robots are aiming for far more intricate work and have a severe lack of access to training data.

    I'll bet that all the data being harvested by smart glasses is now going to train those models. Basically it provides a first-person view of someone doing stuff with their hands all day, walking around, talking, etc.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    Problem is that is too indirect. Imagine trying to do that intricate work on sight alone. Like trying to do stuff with numb hands. Without tactile feedback, we are useless in a lot of these tasks. But the tactile feedback is not instrumented. To the extent that machine learning works, it needs to have all the inputs and outputs instrumented, and feeling is left out.

    We can see something done and have an explanation and internalize it and then 'get a feel for it' later. But AI doesn't currently feature this ability to really translate that sort of instruction to an entirely different set of sensation.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago* (2 children)

    Interesting issue regarding the gloves situation. However I might add that gloves are often used for safety whereas a robot might not need that safety. For example, pulling weeds.

    Though, I think you’re getting at something subtle. It’s not about tasks which require gloves. It’s about any theoretical task which would become harder if you happened to do it with gloves on.

    That’s a lot of tasks when you think about it. For starters, I use my fingers in a kind of “friction test” to make sure I’ve fully cleaned a dish of any oil. If my finger slides, it needs another scrub.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    It's not about the machinery struggling with gloves, it's just the difficulty of capturing the data when a human really needs to touch/feel.

    Like that 'friction test', the point is when they use machine learning, they want to feed all the inputs and outputs from the human operator. They don't have a good way of capturing 'feel' (you can have a camera to capture what eyes see, you can have microphones to capture what the human hears). Similar on human inputs, for a car, they can instrument the pedals and steering and they pretty much got it all. If a human hand is doing something, well, if the human is local they might be able to make a glove to capture all that, but our sense of feeling can be fouled so easily that trying to instrument it tends to ruin it. If the human is remote then you can just get controller style inputs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago

    Yeah, this should be researched. How would you produce an analog signal to represent touch semantics?

    You ever heard of that paper, *what the frog eye tells the frog brain” (Or something like that) ? It covers what’s effectively semantic information, not bits of data, getting sent over the central nerve. Edges, flashes, …

    I wonder what the skin might tell the brain.

    I also wonder if there would be a way to bounce a static field, or something, off the surface… maybe vibrate the material, etc,,, to approximate these sort of details.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 23 points 2 months ago (8 children)

    No, the robot killed the "need a maid" argument.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    No, the robot killed Grandma when it glitched out (having never properly functioned to start) fell on her and punctured her lung.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    There's an onion video about "Sony 's newest thing that doesn't fucking do what it's supposed to do.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (3 children)
  • [–] 19 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    Wtf is a "need a roommate" argument?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago

    I can think of several arguments for needing a roommate. None of them have to do with making my bed. Perhaps that would fall into the "wife" category, but it's hardly a priority. I can make my own damn bed just fine.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago*

    Roommates make your bed, no? Clean your dishes? Vacuum the place? Keep the WiFi running? Make sure everything is paid up on time? Why wouldn't you want someone who cleans up for you and otherwise stays out of your way?

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 18 points 2 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

    My aunt once told me "making your bed is like making yourself a present you can unwrap later".

    Didn't inspire me at all

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago

    As someone who has perpetually battled the blankets never being correct - you're gonna end up doing it anyway. The only difference is that one way looks much nicer than the other, and has the added benefit of being a start-up ritual.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago

    My mom just moved into an assisted-living facility and immediately had a fall trying to make her own bed. They of course make the beds for you there but only after breakfast and my mom's mind at 7:30 am couldn't handle the "mess" ... of one corner of the blanket being turned down. Meanwhile I just sleep on my mattress with a mexican blanket over me.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 17 points 2 months ago

    That's not how you spell "maid", mate.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

    I'm imagining that guy spraying water in the face of a whimpering man chained to a radiator while yelling "Shut up! Bad roommate!"

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    What a fucking idiot. How out-of-touch can they be!?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago

    It's so out of touch that it flips around to being some bizarro joke that no comedian could actually come up with. So far removed from the reassuring embrace of reason, yet somehow manages to capture everything wrong with this world in but a few words. It's... beautiful.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago

    What's even funnier is that the video of the robot making the bed was AI generated. This bed making robot doesn't even exist, yet guy has to shame people having roommates? :D

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

    Rich people understand that the only market for these monstrosities are other rich people.

    The "roommate" thing is an attempt to make them more acceptable while they're still being developed for other purposes. The purposes they will be used for against the poor who will never be able to afford or control one.

    We are not the intended user of advanced robots. They'd never hand off such tech to people who could figure out how to turn the robots against them.

    You and I will never see a general-purpose, programmable advanced robot in our house making our bed, or doing the laundry. It just will not happen. They can only risk dumbed-down, locked-down, weak and single purpose robots for us. They could mass produce the advanced ones, and make them more affordable, but they never will.

    This is one reason I predict that future household robots will be physically tied to the house, riding on tracks, dependent on a wired power grid, not batteries, unable to ambulate.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    The purposes they will be used for against the poor who will never be able to afford or control one.

    I dunno, we might end up seeing them become commonplace. They'll be on an "affordable" monthly loan perhaps, but you're right, it would be like having a snitch and a cop in every home. That's the only reason it'd be subsidized.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    Yeah, I didn't think of that. Nothing like having a cop stationed right in the living room 24/7.

    I still think they might be afraid to give us private, 24/7 access to the machines. They can't defend themselves once their battery dies. They can't phone home from inside a faraday cage. They can't hide their secrets from a power grinder.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›