XatolosStartup set to brick $800 kids robot is trying to open source it first
vikingUsing some creepy robot with a proprietary algorithm to provide “emotional support” to children sounds like a good thing to go out of business.
RobotToasterIIRC they were designed for kids with autism.
SloveneSo these robots will be autobots?
I bet the kids feel lies to, so probably decepticons
At least they learned from this and didn’t kill off Duke!
roll out 😎
One would expect kids with autism to be more picky about their emotional support, not less
I’m sure it worked for some and not for others.
it’s about being able to read emotions:
a large portion of autistic people have trouble reading emotions in others.
that’s why they’re often drawn to things like books, comics, animated content, theater, and, like in this example, robots that clearly express their emotions.
speaking for myself (diagnosed ASD), it’s the ambiguity that bothers me more than anything. i like it when things are nice and clear, neatly organized, and generally don’t require a lot of attention to interpret.
interpreting the environment is taxing enough, adding a lot of emotional interpreting on top can quickly get overwhelming, which leads to poor mood, performance, and ultimately just straight-up headaches…again, this isn’t a hunch, it was part of the ASD diagnostic test.
so i can imagine how much easier it is for kids with similar problems to relate emotionally to something that shows it’s emotions in clear, easily recognizable ways, rather than having to guess constantly. that constant guessing gets real tiring, real quick…
I have very recently been diagnosed ASD, and in my childhood I think a toy pretending to have emotions, but in fact not having them, would make me much more anxious than no such toy at all, just me jumping around imagining things.
Cats and dogs would be easier. Or soft toys.
like that other comment said: it’s not for everyone.
some kids are gonna love it, some are gonna hate it.
target demographics for products aren’t monoliths ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
This should be a standard requirement for abandoning an internet reliant product (with all IP and internal documentation released and becoming public domain in the event of a bankruptcy, and keys handled by some consumer protection agency capable of facilitating community projects working to unlock them for owners).
But questionable value of the product aside, the fact that they’re making the effort to not be assholes and try to do what it takes to give their costumers’ products the life they can is better than most, so they deserve credit for that.
Electronic products and software should get a “at least supported until” label on the packaging and legally obligated to keep the servers running until that time.
Only if there’s an absolute bare minimum they’re allowed to choose of 5-10 years after the last device is sold.
And even then, I still think they should be required to unlock devices to allow people who want to maintain them themselves.
The company behind this robot is going bankrupt, which is why support ends and they stop working. This law would do nothing in this case because the company seizes to exist.
You can put money and source code in escrow for this exact eventuality.
*ceases, a cute -to-text error
No just a non-native English speaker in this case
Still cute
You’re cute
seizes to exist.
It should be considered an obligation to be met in the bankruptcy process. If they sell the IP for the product the purchaser should have to meet it. Failing that the users should be given the IP rights (opensource would meet this def to me) then.
In just world at least
uisEU citizens can sign EU Citizens’ Initiative for this for games.
But that’s communism!!1!1!!
EU pushed new product liability bill. After it takes effect companies will be responsible for breaking of devices and software.
Seems like a good move but it will also raise the risk of releasing new tech. Startup money will have to include some kind of coverage for that, making it harder to get startup money. Rather than simply impose a liability I would feel better about requiring orphaned IP to be opensourced so interested parties can do exactly what’s happening in this case.
Nah, if a company goes bankrupt, their entire software base should just be posted online.
Or sold like their many assets.
I agree if they simply go away, what they produced should become opensource. Sometimes this involves removing dependencies on proprietary software, which anybody who used the opensourced portion would in turn have to pay to license. So they have to rewrite those parts or make special arrangements. Anyway it’s not the slam-dunk you might think. Like after what happens in an action cop movie everybody walks away, but in reality they would spend months or years in court over damages to buildings, passersby getting hurt, etc. Nothing is ever as simple as outsiders think.
but it will also raise the risk of releasing new tech.
It has FOSS exemption.
Rather than simply impose a liability I would feel better about requiring orphaned IP to be opensourced so interested parties can do exactly what’s happening in this case.
In a way it does that.
Greg ClarkeIs there missing punctuation in that headline or am I an idiot?
No, there is no punctuation missing, the headline writing style is just hurting comprehensibility. I’ll expand it a bit.
“A startup, which is set to brick an $800 kids’ robot, is trying to open-source it first”
Cheers, I can read and comprehend the original headline now. I’m Australian so English isn’t my first language, at least that’s my excuse.
lemmyngHere you go then
“Oi, this startup’s about to turn an $800 kids’ robot into a bloody paperweight, but they’re havin’ a crack at open-sourcing it before it carks it.”
I was able to read that with the accent. Goodonya
I'm Australian so English isn't my first language
So...what is your first language then?
ɯᴉuoʇuɐI clicked on this thread only to figure out what that title is supposed to mean.
Yes, it should at least be kids’. Kids robot doesn’t make sense.
Why is it “wet” in the danger zone?
TimeSquirrelI just don't get it with these proprietary cloud connected devices. Do people just not realize that keeping server infrastructure running for free after a product is sold is not in a company's best profit-seeking interests (maybe they don't even think about how things on the Internet actually work, I dunno)? I thought of this almost fifteen years ago when I started seeing smart thermostats. There should always be an option to go local, even if it requires the consumer to acquire a skillset in IT. Maybe we can start working things like that into right to repair legislation if it isn't already.
UsernameblankfaceMost people don’t think about how things work. I’d guess that most customers thought all the smart features were internal and the Internet connection was just an arbitrary requirement
D_Air1Exactly. Another example of people who are on forums like this are worlds apart from people who know quite literally less than nothing about computers.
Toes♀I once had a tech support ticket for a computer not turning on. When I checked it out, they had connected a power bar to itself. This 40yr old man genuinely didn’t understand why that wouldn’t work.
Did they grow up in an Amish house? How is that possible
I really don’t know. All I can say was he was one of the lucky 10,000 that day.
Electric companies hate this one simple trick for unlimited free electricity!
For home stuff, look for the tech “Matter over Thread”. They’re protocols* designed to allow your stuff to work with any ecosystem, including local.
It’s been slow to roll out, largely, imo, because companies would prefer to lock people into their own ecosystems and apps. Apple, Google, and Samsung do have some motivations to be interoperable though, and Matter/Thread is that effort. Consider looking at Home Assistant if you want to know more about this ecosystem and local, open control.
I could go into more detail, but this is already a tangent.
maybe they don’t even think about how things on the Internet actually work, I dunno
bingo! that’s the reason behind most of their illogical decisions
just ask around, and you’ll find that they want things to just work without understanding how they work
ZeroOneOpenSourcing is a good move
What is “trying to” open source though? Make the GitHub repo public, include the database schema, and you’re done.
Startups like this aren’t known for their robust infrastructure design.
It’s most likely running on some weird unicorn setups no-one has bothered to document.
Definitely missing documentation to make it a proper repo
Fear of embarrassing code is often a factor too. Amazing how coding standards instantly improve across the board the moment you realize people outside of dev might be scrutinizing what you’ve been shipping to customers.
This is true even for my personal projects lol
I’m not a programmer but dabble. I’m always so nervous when actual programmers look at my code.
SemperverusTrue programmers know that novice code is a rite of passage. Every programmer worth their salt looks at their own older code and cringes at it. Most people who do this for a living are more likely to give helpful pointers rather than tear you down, if anything.
yep, do this all the time… even for yesterdays code prior to second coffee time
I literally added pre commit checks to my personal repos today to lint and format