However, the obsession with bi-pedal robots is creepy and weird.
I watched someone on YouTube talking about it but can't remember the channel.
Basically, there is no single task for which bipedal is the best format, it's only suitable for the range of tasks humans can perform. However, we just don't have the tech to make that format viable. As in, they can't do the dishes or clean the bathroom or take out the trash.
Demonstrations of bots doing those things are in tightly controlled environments with loads of programmed parameters.
Its appealing because everyone wants a humanoid to order around, but that's about it.
The obsession with bipedal robots is great. It fulfills the urge to reproduce without having to reproduce. So once we have those, we can stop having children and end this stupid species.
Thinking the stupidity meme won't jump from one species to the next is just a lazy cop out, regardless of the species we just have to stop being stupid and there's no one single switch that can be flipped for that
I'm guessing there need to be a bunch of sensors to monitor the foetus's growth. I'm also guessing by 'robot' they mean 'machine with some decision making and executing capability' and not 'machine that looks like a human'.
30 years, yes, but for the past 15 or so it's been clear that China is pulling way ahead in every metric. I think home ownership has been in the 90s% for a long time. Likewise, the fall of the American empire started with Reagan, it was clear where this train was headed, capitalism will always end in fascism.
The Hallmark of the Maoist Revolution was guaranting every citizen owned the land they lived on.
Also what kicked off the Tianamen Square riots. Deng's privatization reforms went against the Maoist principles of public ownership, in pursuit of a modern urban industrial model. And the public backlash erupted into street fighting in the capital that killed tens of thousands of people.
Likewise, the fall of the American empire started with Reagan
A bit early to close the book on American Empire. It took over a century for the UK to come off it's Victorian Era peak. Along the way, they created modern computers and jet engines, which they used to commit multiple genocides.
I don't claim to be an expert on the endocrine system. But I know enough to know it's the most complicated system in the body. Possibly more complicated than the brain (my area of expertise).
And only recently did scientists figure out how to high jack the endocrine system for weight loss and not without plenty of side effects.
So in order for a baby to come to term, it must be exposed to different hormones , at different levels, at different times that come from the mother.
We can't produce all of those hormones.
We can't even currently determine all of hormone needs of a fetus. So there is no way to meet these needs. Not to mention the protein needs. Again, many of which are made by the mother. And can't be synthetic.
We can grow an embryo in a container for quite a while. weeks. Maybe even a few months.
Sure, you can attach it to a roomba with temperature control.
But that's not the same as being able to grow a baby to term.
We just need something "good enough", it doesn't need to be fully developed, just to grow up enough to mop some floors, maybe pick some items in an amazon warehouse
All these related AI claims like "AI will cure cancer" or anything related to AI solving otherwise unsolved scientific problems are always hilarious. Curing cancer or any other disease requires us to fully understand the biological mechanisms of the disease enough to then even attempt to affect it with a drug.
AI learns and does its thing via input data from human knowledge and our current understanding. How can AI possibly gain an understanding of the disease mechanism or biological/biochemical system beyond that which humans understand? Not to mention it can't perform any sort of experiments to even test an idea.
Sure I can appreciate it speeding up certain analyses that are otherwise tedious to do ourselves, but it's never going to spit out some magic bullet cure
Agree. And also. Scientists have been using and running statistical software analysis since like the late 70s. Everyone acts like we don't have tried and true methods already.
Some machine learning might be useful though in research but idk if it's fair to call it "ai". Idk it depends on your definition.
Actually in the research I do, I was looking into papers that measured a lot more variables than what is commonly done. (Usually two things are compared) And the authors used a formula to determine interactive effects based on which factors aligned or didn't align and by how much.
This type of statistics is close to how ai works as it gives "weights" to different inputs.
But this was a method the authors came up with and they fully disclosed how it worked and acknowledged it was only one of many approaches to determining these interactive effects.
The research I'm referring to was about vision. Accommodation and vergence. Which function together. And you can manipulate them so they don't match and see which one has a stronger influence on the perception of depth. However, many other factors effect depth perception. But it's nearly impossible to study how these each contribute when multiples other factors are present. Some matching the true depth. Some giving an incorrect cue. Which cue, when wrong, overrides the correct one? If two matching cure are present, is there one cue that's wrong, but has a stronger impact on the perception ?
These things are difficult to determine without literally thousands of studies.
The complete lack of a moral compass and legal ramifications displayed so far by the techbros might give them a very small advantage. But that shit always ends up being nothing more then useless torture in the end with little in the way of results.
The thing a lot of people don't understand about unethical science is that it's almost always shit science to boot.
For example I hear people say that "sure, what the Nazis scientist did to Jews was awful but we learned so much".
No we didn't.
The only thing that research was good for was determining how long it took for a starved stressed person to die from a specific infliction like hypothermia. Or having limbs cut off. Or having poisons injected into them.
That's literally the only thing gained and because the test subjects themselves were already in poor condition, we can't even use that information to determine, for instance, how long a healthy person could survive with said inflictions.
Their shit ethics is also shit science.
It's worthless.
All those Nazi scientist who got a free get-out-of-jail card and set up in the U.S were shit scientist. They never gave the world anything useful.
Much like the research musk's neurolink does.
They dont get published papers because it's unethical and shit science.
Nothing useful comes from mass maiming and torturing of animals. Neurolink.... I don't even want to get into why it has so many methodology flaws. But it's not being done properly.
Shit ethics is always shit science too.
People think letting these tech bros cross ethical restrictions will result in faster tech advances, they are sorely mistaken.
I don't disagree with your overall point, we aren't close to roboreproduction and it will take decades of incredibly unethical experiments to change that.
But we as a species are really really good at organic chemistry. We can make anything out of carbon and friends that God can, and many things they can't.
Ah yes, break the bonds that bind family and ultimately society together to "protect women". It is only lethal in places with shitty medical car....okay I see where you are going with this.
There is a lot that happens in utero. Sharing the mother's immune system, learning the voice of the mother and people around them, not to mention the various hormonal changes that prepare the mother physically and psychologically to care for an infant.
Pregnancy can be dangerous but we really need to be careful whenever we introduce new medical technology.
Your mother gives birth to you. She doesn't just donate genetic material. She carries you inside her for 9 months before pushing you out and holding you as you take your first breathe. This is the way it has been for millions of years.
What people are proposing is breaking that human cycle. Eliminating the investment of time body and soul into the next generation. Pretending this wouldn't have significant impacts on our society is farcical. Population could literally be controlled by whoever has the money.
We would also likely end up in a Gattaca situation because who would want to spend the money on a defective baby. Crispr babies raised by the government or corporations doesn't sound like a future I would look forward to.
are you just pretending adoption doesnt happen or what? or caesarians, surrogate mothership or testtube babies? Or are you speculating without any evidence that just being born like this would instil irriversible lifelong trauma? Speficially what about this do you think will crash society besides vague personal feelings of ick?
Why yes women having to carry pregnancies for nine months and then having to go through the pains of giving birth is a good thing we should not relieve them of that burden even when technology allows that thank you for asking.
Bet the price will be absolutely prohibitive, letting only the rich use them.
Bet it will be used to shield the rich from the consequences of failing medical systems.
I'm not saying it's a bad technology, I'm saying it's being developed by the time, money, and effort, and for the benefit of parasites, assuming it's not just marketing for a cash-grab startup.
We second this, as a trans woman, it would be really nice to actually have a child like any other woman even if it's through external means, or for women who simply don’t want/cant carry a child safely or are of parents who cant conceive/aren’t about to convince easily.
No, it wouldn't. It allows companies and states to mass produce human beings with whatever genetic variations they wish. Women are a very critical resistor to that kind of consolidation of control of our species.
I agree. Based on my secondhand observations, pregnancy is 9 months of discomfort in one form or another, followed by plumbing problems for years afterwards. Nobody should go through that if they don't wish to.
There is zero chance that manufactured wombs would be as plentiful and cheap as the wombs of billions of women that already exist on the forseeable future.
True, just like the fact that the plentiful and cheap humans are a finite source of wombs, while once you grow a bunch of babies with the robot womb you get enough eggs and semen to make more babies so that source is a bigger infinite.
Correct. The Clone Troopers were clones, which in the prequel movies is very clearly pointed out, but by the time of Episode IV: A New Hope the Empire had been recruiting from the general population. Much like most wars which drag on for a while, the elite forces end up having to let in new recruits to fill in gaps from those who were lost. These recruits might not have more than just some basic training, and when rebels then infiltrate weapons manufacturing plants and fiddle with the quality of the guns provided to these troops (IIRC mentioned in Andor if not elsewhere), it's no wonder the Storm Troopers had worse aim than the Clone Troopers.
It's explicitly stated in A New Hope that they were shooting to miss when the main characters were escaping the Death Star because a tracker had been planted on the Millennium Falcon and they planned to follow it and destroy whichever planet was hosting the rebel base. You can't do that if you don't let them escape. Every other time they're in battle, stormtroopers are shown to be devastatingly effective except when a small garrison is overwhelmed by a vasty larger number of ewoks.
The first ones were the clone left over from the GAR after the Empire "paid off" the clone army and started replacing them with citizens. Hell, the Empire used a inferior type of clones for years after the destruction of the Kaminoian facilities.
All hail the dystopian future, where countries don't need people to make babies, in fact, they oughtn't, as it decreases worker productivity. They can just order a steady amount of new slaves workers being born.
As a gay guy I'd love if this were real and widely available. I would be able to become a father, but not have to navigate the moral minefields of surrogacy and adoption
Well provided someone consents to "just" give you an egg (which may have moral issues but are far simpler by comparison) then yeah there's much less to navigate
This is the problem, men thinking is just an egg...
Thing.
But baby human being ? What about baby??? Like everyone's dream is to not have mother even the one who birthed that human being. How is abouts baby's psychological state knowing that s/he came from machine?
Nah, there are no morality issues..
The same fear that people had for IVF pregnancies. No one can tell by looking how you were born (unless your head got stuck in that cone shape if you had to be yanked out by suction)
The idea is rooted in eugenics. Scientists fertilized a egg with a sperm, bypassing "survival of the fittest" in the womb, which somehow makes the genes "weaker", which somehow makes the resulting child less valid
Huh. You're saying the ones mocking the idea of test tube babies were the eugenicists?
I've understood it as test tube babies being mocked because of the idea that someone is brewing up their own genetically modified baby, like a eugenicist's wet dream. Think GATTACA.
123 Comments
randamumaki@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 98 pts · 2d
It is just a concept right now. It has not yet delivered any live births.
"Despite optimism, experts state that the technology is still far from full implementation." https://thaitimes.com/a-robot-to-give-birth-the-chinese-announcement-that-shakes-the-world
The same proposed robot went viral in 2025 but was entirely fake: https://www.livescience.com/health/fertility-pregnancy-birth/pregnancy-robot-from-china-is-fake-but-is-the-technology-behind-it-possible
turdas@suppo.fi · 57 pts · 2d
Both those links are about the same (fake) robot by Kaiwa Technology.
EggInDisguise@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 11 pts · 2d
Well damn, I've been seeing variations of this concept for decades, but nobody ever claimed it was "developed"
Valmond@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 2d
Generates more clicks I guess 😒
MonkeMischief@lemmy.today · 8 pts · 2d
I'm sickened by how many "flawed trials" are going to result out of such a thing before it "succeeds."
Even as a goal, this is so wrong on every level. The stuff of nightmares.
Darkard@lemmy.world · 67 pts · 2d
Why the fuck does it have to have a robot body?
What's the point? Just make an artificial womb and be done with it.
Just tacking on dog shit robotics just means it's needlessly complex and has more fault areas.
More dumbass tech shit.
Sv443@sh.itjust.works · 69 pts · 2d
You're right, so there's a 99.9% chance it's AI generated for clickbait
Uri@infosec.pub · 14 pts · 2d
Nope 100%
im_fine_sandy@nord.pub · 33 pts · 2d
The answer is: gen AI slop.
However, the obsession with bi-pedal robots is creepy and weird.
I watched someone on YouTube talking about it but can't remember the channel.
Basically, there is no single task for which bipedal is the best format, it's only suitable for the range of tasks humans can perform. However, we just don't have the tech to make that format viable. As in, they can't do the dishes or clean the bathroom or take out the trash.
Demonstrations of bots doing those things are in tightly controlled environments with loads of programmed parameters.
Its appealing because everyone wants a humanoid to order around, but that's about it.
surewhynotlem@lemmy.world · -18 pts · 2d
The obsession with bipedal robots is great. It fulfills the urge to reproduce without having to reproduce. So once we have those, we can stop having children and end this stupid species.
gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2d
Thinking the stupidity meme won't jump from one species to the next is just a lazy cop out, regardless of the species we just have to stop being stupid and there's no one single switch that can be flipped for that
Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works · 28 pts · 2d
I am pretty sure the picture is not representative of the actual device.
webp@mander.xyz · 16 pts · 2d
More fetish potential
bitjunkie@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 2d
ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net · 7 pts · 2d
So it can sit in those reserved places on public transport. It would be wasted space otherwise.
halfapage@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2d
BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 2d
People who watched too many movies.
emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 2d
I'm guessing there need to be a bunch of sensors to monitor the foetus's growth. I'm also guessing by 'robot' they mean 'machine with some decision making and executing capability' and not 'machine that looks like a human'.
jaybone@lemmy.zip · 37 pts · 2d
BurgerBaron@quokk.au · 36 pts · 2d
FishFace@piefed.social · 13 pts · 2d
Never noticed before how nice the butt on the next human battery is...
BurgerBaron@quokk.au · 3 pts · 2d
Same actually, dayum.
dregan@lemmy.world · 35 pts · 2d
If you had told me 30 years ago that China would be "Brave New World" and the US would be "1984" I would have thought that you got it backwards.
Malyca@lemmy.zip · 24 pts · 2d
30 years, yes, but for the past 15 or so it's been clear that China is pulling way ahead in every metric. I think home ownership has been in the 90s% for a long time. Likewise, the fall of the American empire started with Reagan, it was clear where this train was headed, capitalism will always end in fascism.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2d
The Hallmark of the Maoist Revolution was guaranting every citizen owned the land they lived on.
Also what kicked off the Tianamen Square riots. Deng's privatization reforms went against the Maoist principles of public ownership, in pursuit of a modern urban industrial model. And the public backlash erupted into street fighting in the capital that killed tens of thousands of people.
A bit early to close the book on American Empire. It took over a century for the UK to come off it's Victorian Era peak. Along the way, they created modern computers and jet engines, which they used to commit multiple genocides.
daannii@lemmy.world · 33 pts · 2d
I don't claim to be an expert on the endocrine system. But I know enough to know it's the most complicated system in the body. Possibly more complicated than the brain (my area of expertise).
And only recently did scientists figure out how to high jack the endocrine system for weight loss and not without plenty of side effects.
So in order for a baby to come to term, it must be exposed to different hormones , at different levels, at different times that come from the mother.
We can't produce all of those hormones. We can't even currently determine all of hormone needs of a fetus. So there is no way to meet these needs. Not to mention the protein needs. Again, many of which are made by the mother. And can't be synthetic.
We can grow an embryo in a container for quite a while. weeks. Maybe even a few months.
Sure, you can attach it to a roomba with temperature control.
But that's not the same as being able to grow a baby to term.
jnod4@lemmy.ca · 19 pts · 2d
We just need something "good enough", it doesn't need to be fully developed, just to grow up enough to mop some floors, maybe pick some items in an amazon warehouse
CultLeader4Hire@lemmy.world · 11 pts · 2d
Brave New World vibes
TheBloodFarts@lemmy.ca · 8 pts · 2d
All these related AI claims like "AI will cure cancer" or anything related to AI solving otherwise unsolved scientific problems are always hilarious. Curing cancer or any other disease requires us to fully understand the biological mechanisms of the disease enough to then even attempt to affect it with a drug.
AI learns and does its thing via input data from human knowledge and our current understanding. How can AI possibly gain an understanding of the disease mechanism or biological/biochemical system beyond that which humans understand? Not to mention it can't perform any sort of experiments to even test an idea.
Sure I can appreciate it speeding up certain analyses that are otherwise tedious to do ourselves, but it's never going to spit out some magic bullet cure
daannii@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
Agree. And also. Scientists have been using and running statistical software analysis since like the late 70s. Everyone acts like we don't have tried and true methods already.
Some machine learning might be useful though in research but idk if it's fair to call it "ai". Idk it depends on your definition.
Actually in the research I do, I was looking into papers that measured a lot more variables than what is commonly done. (Usually two things are compared) And the authors used a formula to determine interactive effects based on which factors aligned or didn't align and by how much.
This type of statistics is close to how ai works as it gives "weights" to different inputs.
But this was a method the authors came up with and they fully disclosed how it worked and acknowledged it was only one of many approaches to determining these interactive effects.
The research I'm referring to was about vision. Accommodation and vergence. Which function together. And you can manipulate them so they don't match and see which one has a stronger influence on the perception of depth. However, many other factors effect depth perception. But it's nearly impossible to study how these each contribute when multiples other factors are present. Some matching the true depth. Some giving an incorrect cue. Which cue, when wrong, overrides the correct one? If two matching cure are present, is there one cue that's wrong, but has a stronger impact on the perception ?
These things are difficult to determine without literally thousands of studies.
Simulation6@sopuli.xyz · 3 pts · 1d
The complete lack of a moral compass and legal ramifications displayed so far by the techbros might give them a very small advantage. But that shit always ends up being nothing more then useless torture in the end with little in the way of results.
daannii@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
Absolutely.
The thing a lot of people don't understand about unethical science is that it's almost always shit science to boot.
For example I hear people say that "sure, what the Nazis scientist did to Jews was awful but we learned so much".
No we didn't.
The only thing that research was good for was determining how long it took for a starved stressed person to die from a specific infliction like hypothermia. Or having limbs cut off. Or having poisons injected into them.
That's literally the only thing gained and because the test subjects themselves were already in poor condition, we can't even use that information to determine, for instance, how long a healthy person could survive with said inflictions.
Their shit ethics is also shit science.
It's worthless.
All those Nazi scientist who got a free get-out-of-jail card and set up in the U.S were shit scientist. They never gave the world anything useful.
Much like the research musk's neurolink does.
They dont get published papers because it's unethical and shit science.
Nothing useful comes from mass maiming and torturing of animals. Neurolink.... I don't even want to get into why it has so many methodology flaws. But it's not being done properly.
Shit ethics is always shit science too.
People think letting these tech bros cross ethical restrictions will result in faster tech advances, they are sorely mistaken.
Axolotl_cpp@feddit.it · 2 pts · 2d
machine learning is by definition a form of AI
Muffindrake@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 2d
Chinese propaganda slop. Nothing substantial to see here. I don't even know why this is not immediately deleted by mods.
ThePyroPython@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
Because it's lemmy.
daannii@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
There are two sides to your point.
If you remove it, someone just will likely see it somewhere else.
If you don't remove it, people get a chance to challenge it in the comments.
Hupf@feddit.org · 3 pts · 2d
https://youtu.be/THNPmhBl-8I ;-)
daannii@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2d
I'm not a brain surgeon. I'm not even in medicine.
Cog neuro.
But my point was I know a lot about a complex system. And even compared to it, the endocrine system looks insanely more complex.
But also that clip was pretty funny. I'll save it back for the next time I sound pretentious.
skibidi@lemmy.world · -3 pts · 1d
We can, in fact, produce all those hormones.
I don't disagree with your overall point, we aren't close to roboreproduction and it will take decades of incredibly unethical experiments to change that.
But we as a species are really really good at organic chemistry. We can make anything out of carbon and friends that God can, and many things they can't.
daannii@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 1d
No, we are not capable of manufacturing all the hormones or even most of them.
There are literally already a hundred that have been identified. But we haven't discovered all of them. New ones are being discovered all the time
Many therapeutic drugs that are hormones are made in animals because we can't synthetically manufacture them.
slaacaa@lemmy.world · 30 pts · 2d
ivanafterall@lemmy.world · 27 pts · 2d
"His mom is a Kranger!"
darthsundhaft@piefed.social · 25 pts · 2d
Newhere@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 2d
At least More natural 🤣
Doomsider@lemmy.world · 23 pts · 2d
Cool, now we can make orphans with technology!
anotherspinelessdem@lemmy.ml · 14 pts · 2d
Or, you know, not put mothers through the painful, dangerous, and potentially lethal ordeal known as pregnancy.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2d
Okay, but this is Chinese technology, so it can only be used for evil
kandoh@reddthat.com · 9 pts · 2d
I'll never forgive China for inventing gun powder
Salamanderwizard@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2d
I'll never forgive China for inventing China.
(Jk btw love everyone except fascists)
Love everyone except fascists = Leef Hehehe
Doomsider@lemmy.world · -7 pts · 2d
Ah yes, break the bonds that bind family and ultimately society together to "protect women". It is only lethal in places with shitty medical car....okay I see where you are going with this.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 2d
Nine months in utero counts for more than your first 18 years of life?
I'll need to break my adopted brother the terrible news
Soggy@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2d
There is a lot that happens in utero. Sharing the mother's immune system, learning the voice of the mother and people around them, not to mention the various hormonal changes that prepare the mother physically and psychologically to care for an infant.
Pregnancy can be dangerous but we really need to be careful whenever we introduce new medical technology.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
Sure? But now you're just arguing with the doctors at the NICU
Doomsider@lemmy.world · -6 pts · 2d
Sorry to break reality to you and him.
Also, we are talking about an artificial womb so you wouldn't have a mother.
queermunist@lemmy.ml · 7 pts · 2d
Do you not realize that an artificial womb still uses a fertilized human egg? Like, genetically, there's still two human parents.
It's not like someone is going to fuck a robot and get it pregnant.
Doomsider@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
Your mother gives birth to you. She doesn't just donate genetic material. She carries you inside her for 9 months before pushing you out and holding you as you take your first breathe. This is the way it has been for millions of years.
What people are proposing is breaking that human cycle. Eliminating the investment of time body and soul into the next generation. Pretending this wouldn't have significant impacts on our society is farcical. Population could literally be controlled by whoever has the money.
We would also likely end up in a Gattaca situation because who would want to spend the money on a defective baby. Crispr babies raised by the government or corporations doesn't sound like a future I would look forward to.
queermunist@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 1d
So by your logic, fatherhood isn't real. Only motherhood is real.
tutter@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 2d
are you just pretending adoption doesnt happen or what? or caesarians, surrogate mothership or testtube babies? Or are you speculating without any evidence that just being born like this would instil irriversible lifelong trauma? Speficially what about this do you think will crash society besides vague personal feelings of ick?
Salamanderwizard@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2d
If even a grain of what you said was true, people wouldn't adopt. Birth doesn't bind a family together. Love and work are what bind a family together.
If it was like you said we wouldn't have parents who starve their kids.
You're a yucky person.
Doomsider@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
What did I say!? Go troll someone else and stop acting like a dumbass.
Hupf@feddit.org · 8 pts · 2d
Can the robots crush them too or does that require different robots?
Beangut@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2d
Hopefully some bright mind will be able to merge this with the crushing machine and we can enter a new golden age of technology.
remon@ani.social · 19 pts · 2d
Oh it can give birth to live babies now! That's definitely a step up!
jaybone@lemmy.zip · 19 pts · 2d
Yeah, the dead baby machine was not as impressive.
idiomaddict@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 2d
Though to be fair, it’s much easier to make.
AeonFelis@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 2d
Why yes women having to carry pregnancies for nine months and then having to go through the pains of giving birth is a good thing we should not relieve them of that burden even when technology allows that thank you for asking.
Daxter101@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 12 pts · 2d
Bet the price will be absolutely prohibitive, letting only the rich use them.
Bet it will be used to shield the rich from the consequences of failing medical systems.
I'm not saying it's a bad technology, I'm saying it's being developed by the time, money, and effort, and for the benefit of parasites, assuming it's not just marketing for a cash-grab startup.
huppakee@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 2d
Main selling point would be how much easier it'd be to disown their loser offspring.
BlindPenguin@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 2d
Just throw it into the recycler and start again /s
ZombieCyborgFromOuterSpace@piefed.ca · 17 pts · 2d
So... We're not getting the Terminator apocalypse? It's going to be The Matrix apocalypse after all?
Malyca@lemmy.zip · 16 pts · 2d
This is a promising way to end surrogacy abuse in the 3rd world. I hope that future is realized.
Johanno@feddit.org · 3 pts · 2d
True that, but there's a long way until that shit is cheaper than real humans
A_Chilean_Cyborg@feddit.cl · 14 pts · 2d
Honestly, I think that artificial wombs will be quite good for society.
GarboDog@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 2d
We second this, as a trans woman, it would be really nice to actually have a child like any other woman even if it's through external means, or for women who simply don’t want/cant carry a child safely or are of parents who cant conceive/aren’t about to convince easily.
minorkeys@sh.itjust.works · 9 pts · 1d
No, it wouldn't. It allows companies and states to mass produce human beings with whatever genetic variations they wish. Women are a very critical resistor to that kind of consolidation of control of our species.
Alwaysnownevernotme@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
Bro imagine how big we can get our skulls with no pelvic floor!
sleet01@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 1d
Lois McMaster Bujold pretty definitively argues for this in her Vorkosigan books.
Dogyote@slrpnk.net · 1 pts · 1d
I agree. Based on my secondhand observations, pregnancy is 9 months of discomfort in one form or another, followed by plumbing problems for years afterwards. Nobody should go through that if they don't wish to.
huppakee@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 2d
Lovely how they went from having a one-child policy to having ∞-child capabilities in just a few decades.
snooggums@piefed.world · 3 pts · 2d
There is zero chance that manufactured wombs would be as plentiful and cheap as the wombs of billions of women that already exist on the forseeable future.
huppakee@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 2d
True, just like the fact that the plentiful and cheap humans are a finite source of wombs, while once you grow a bunch of babies with the robot womb you get enough eggs and semen to make more babies so that source is a bigger infinite.
dbx12@programming.dev · 11 pts · 2d
Well, at least they will be bad at shooting and probably dress in all white armor.
zaphod@sopuli.xyz · 9 pts · 2d
Stormtroopers aren't clones.
randamumaki@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 8 pts · 2d
Correct. The Clone Troopers were clones, which in the prequel movies is very clearly pointed out, but by the time of Episode IV: A New Hope the Empire had been recruiting from the general population. Much like most wars which drag on for a while, the elite forces end up having to let in new recruits to fill in gaps from those who were lost. These recruits might not have more than just some basic training, and when rebels then infiltrate weapons manufacturing plants and fiddle with the quality of the guns provided to these troops (IIRC mentioned in Andor if not elsewhere), it's no wonder the Storm Troopers had worse aim than the Clone Troopers.
AnyOldName3@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 2d
It's explicitly stated in A New Hope that they were shooting to miss when the main characters were escaping the Death Star because a tracker had been planted on the Millennium Falcon and they planned to follow it and destroy whichever planet was hosting the rebel base. You can't do that if you don't let them escape. Every other time they're in battle, stormtroopers are shown to be devastatingly effective except when a small garrison is overwhelmed by a vasty larger number of ewoks.
huppakee@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2d
Clone troopers wear the same white 'uniform': https://starships.com/stormtrooper-vs-clone-trooper/
HikingVet@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 2d
The first ones were the clone left over from the GAR after the Empire "paid off" the clone army and started replacing them with citizens. Hell, the Empire used a inferior type of clones for years after the destruction of the Kaminoian facilities.
Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works · 10 pts · 2d
All hail the dystopian future, where countries don't need people to make babies, in fact, they oughtn't, as it decreases worker productivity. They can just order a steady amount of new
slavesworkers being born.madmantis24@lemmy.wtf · 5 pts · 2d
I don't know, sounds like a Brave New World in our near future
At least we'll have more time for orgies and mind-blowing drug trips, right?
FishFace@piefed.social · 10 pts · 2d
This is an important step for mechaphiles with mpreg fetishes.
sangeteria@lemmy.ml · 9 pts · 2d
As a gay guy I'd love if this were real and widely available. I would be able to become a father, but not have to navigate the moral minefields of surrogacy and adoption
Newhere@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 2d
And here is no issues of morality 🤣
sangeteria@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 1d
Well provided someone consents to "just" give you an egg (which may have moral issues but are far simpler by comparison) then yeah there's much less to navigate
Newhere@lemmy.ml · -1 pts · 1d
This is the problem, men thinking is just an egg... Thing. But baby human being ? What about baby??? Like everyone's dream is to not have mother even the one who birthed that human being. How is abouts baby's psychological state knowing that s/he came from machine? Nah, there are no morality issues..
humorlessrepost@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 2d
Finally, I can clone a Duncan!
chuckleslord@lemmy.world · 9 pts · 2d
The same fear that people had for IVF pregnancies. No one can tell by looking how you were born (unless your head got stuck in that cone shape if you had to be yanked out by suction)
jaybone@lemmy.zip · 7 pts · 2d
Are the cone heads real?
WeirdGoesPro@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 11 pts · 2d
Yes, but they only stay that way as a baby.
NotASharkInAManSuit@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 1d
I’m pretty sure this is the beginning of the movie Soldier (1998), starring Kurt Russel.
Lushed_Lungfish@lemmy.ca · 6 pts · 1d
Trueborns, quiaff?
bitjunkie@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 2d
Finally we have created the Torment Nexus…
Odo@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2d
Ah yes, the backstory to Raised By Wolves.
Amputret@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 2d
Hey, I’ll have no Father slander. Those kids were raised right.
redwattlebird@thelemmy.club · 5 pts · 2d
Aside from the obvious technological barriers to achieve this, are they going to turn them into soylent green when they're no longer useful and old?
mojofrododojo@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2d
eh.. I see the taunts much more likely being "his dad's a techbro"
Jankatarch@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2d
Does it have GPU datacenters? No?
Then not clanker.
TheStaffmaster@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2d
Wasn't this a thing in both the matrix and dune?
Snapz@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d
The movie is called "the pod generation". Makes sure you read those terms of service...
BananaIsABerry@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 2d
We used to make jokes about test tube babies as kids, for some reason. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Funkt4st1c@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2d
The idea is rooted in eugenics. Scientists fertilized a egg with a sperm, bypassing "survival of the fittest" in the womb, which somehow makes the genes "weaker", which somehow makes the resulting child less valid
qarbone@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
Huh. You're saying the ones mocking the idea of test tube babies were the eugenicists?
I've understood it as test tube babies being mocked because of the idea that someone is brewing up their own genetically modified baby, like a eugenicist's wet dream. Think GATTACA.
Malyca@lemmy.zip · -3 pts · 2d
Taking the power of making life away from women. This way, the man decides everything.
HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2d
sometimes i wonder how remedial an education some y'all got at biology
Smaile@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 2d
Oh yah this won't be bad.
Thyazide@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d
This is a minor sorry point in the classic "hell a cyber punk thriller" game from the 90's.
Uri@infosec.pub · 2 pts · 2d
Like every year
LoremIpsumGenerator@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
Is safe for human dih not to get electrocuted?
sigezayaq@startrek.website · 1 pts · 1d
Stolas@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 2d
Wish my mother was a clanker.
Sam_Bass@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 2d
better than a clicker
lightnsfw@reddthat.com · 1 pts · 2d
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkMoIMBBEXQ