>>18572 Simple. Start smol, grow big. Same as the great Henry Ford and a zillion other entrepreneurs have. Our choice for a DIY ethos -- while driven by simple necessity -- is no accident. Its only through the efforts of thousands and thousands of garage amateurs that we can ever hope to keep the Globohomo from lumbering in and cornering this (absolutely gigantic potential) market, then sending in their thugs to punish anyone who would dare create their own robowaifu, unencubered by their BigBrother'OVision(tm) and all the evils thereto. And we are also in a race against time to manage that, OP. Welcome, Chuck. >=== -minor prose edit -add greeting

>>18573 >thousands of garage amateurs that we can ever hope to keep the Globohomo from lumbering in and cornering this agreed. but also - once humanoid robotics explodes, what is to stop anyone from reoutfitting or reverse engineering just about any humanoid android into a waifu? Curious if you or anyone can brainstorm any scenarios that would prevent this. Like a power supply lockout or some way the personality is hardwired to the hardware? I can't see it, in any case as long as we have access to AGI, hardware is a nonissue. The only final exception I can see is if humanoid robotics becomes so hyper specialized that any servos or power supplies that just "work" will be proprietary af, some chip locking you out and everything sealed up like Apple does. Nothing but the limb parts that attach to each other via proprietary locking mechanics. Ok I just went down a very dystopian rabbit hole. To counter argue that: I think there are several intermediate steps along the way we could catch before they actually software-lock the actual hardware. Let's keep that in mind though!

>>18574 >what is to stop anyone from reoutfitting or reverse engineering just about any humanoid android into a waifu? Nothing that I can forsee. As long as the base systems are open-sauce, >any scenarios that would prevent this. and some kind of Filthy Commie-like approach to the hardware (such as Apple's, et al) isn't in place, it should be reasonably straightforward AFAICT, Meta Ronin. >...Ok I just went down a very dystopian rabbit hole. Heh, I would actually call it the "Globohomo Big-Tech/Gov" rabbit hole, and it's far deeper, uglier, and darker than any of us here can possibly imagine. This is why we have to 'beat them to the punch' so to speak. :^) A) We will make the software entirely open-sauce. B) We will make all the hardware plans, blueprints, etc., entirely open sauce (and as many items with multiple vendors, etc, as possible). C) We will encourage the spread of all this information far & wide, 'to the ends of the earth'. Not much else I can see we could do to further our cause here, nor do I think it needs much more either. Gararge enthusiasts, and the next Henry Fords, Orville & Wilbur Wrights, et al will take it from there (including ourselves ofc :^)

>>18572 > How would the robowaifu market theoretically function? My personal take: - I'm building her for myself, everything else is just audience for motivation. Political and social goals are secondary but still somewhat relevant. I'm not here to make money, especially not big time. If anything, then from skills I acquire and could use them somewhere else. - There will be many different models from cheap to expensive. Or rather somewhat like frameworks to create a somewhat tailor made solution. - Local groups and circles should help each other out in building their robowaifus, especially at the beginning. It's not primarily a business. - When it picks up popularity, then local companies should do the finishing work of painting and such, I guess. Parts will be 3D printed locally at the beginning or later mass produced, and at some point complex parts will come pre-assembled. Computers should be installed by the owner, and ideally be bought without disclosing the use case. > Top of the line models would be very expensive, Depends. Compared to what? Even 10-15k would be like a cheap new car. Compared to marriage and divorce it's still cheap. Compared to buying a representative car, living in an urban area, and spending money on dates, it would also be at least competitive, but certainly cheaper in the long run. >but the target demographic is poor with little income flow. The target demographic ranges from poor to financially independent and from consoomers to tech savvy makers. I don't know where you get the idea that we would all be poor. If anything then frugal. > It would be a hard and gradual process to replace supermodels that the wealthy have with robot wives, and a vast amount of anime supporters with wealth or status are seeking a conventional tradwife. A lot of questionable assumptions. GNU+Linux has 1.5 percent market share on the desktop, these are still tens of millions of people. There are billions of men out there. At least some hundred millions with some money to spend. We build it and they will come. > Essentially, it’s a very high value commodity without a niche, so it would be hard for it to garner success as a product, Are you trying to demoralize us? The price ranges from close to nothing to maybe some ten thousands, but rather 10-15k, with some unique ultra luxury special models above maybe. Guys with barely any money can go for the virtual waifus, the AI might be partially the same. Of course, some PC for 1k might be necessary. This will be mainly a security trade-off. > and the intended audience would never receive their robowaifus. How do you know who they are? Why would they all be poor? Including all the men with savings which are living alone? Guys with some money and skills or willing to learn how to build them will be the first target group. Then more and more specialized parts can get mass produced. >The robowaifu concept is excellent theoretically, but has no real avenue to thrive in practice. How could these issues be resolved? These issues don't exist, you constructed them. By using "top of the line models" and assumptions on how poor the target audience is. We will simply develop something and then it will get picked up at some point.

>>18576 >We build it and they will come. This.

>>18576 >Are you trying to demoralize us? My intentions were not to demoralize anyone. I think that if you have a solid plan in mind that you adhere to, things will all work out. Besides, I think it’s a noble endeavor regardless. If you think that your product will succeed you may be correct. I’m sure that if robowaifus were created and distributed at a mass level, they would see a fairly high degree of success. However, I am skeptical towards the widespread integration and acceptance of robot wives within society, I can’t see that being an overnight process and I’m sure that it would take time for them to receive the same public impressions as human women. Also, I think you’re failing to recognize the extreme, universal draw robowaifus have towards poorer individuals. A caregiving robot wife would be every NEET’s wet dream (hell, it’s mine too) and most would be unable to obtain it. I think that this disparity would sink these young men into even deeper depression, which isn’t something under your control but it would be unfortunate side effect. You could argue that it would incentivize hard work/saving, but most of them wouldn’t go through the effort. All of this is to say that I think the audience most desperate for the product, which makes up a larger portion than you may realize (these are men without regards for most social norms who would be ready to embrace something their families/friends would not, which is not something working/upper class men would do, even subconsciously) would be situationally barred from purchase. Therefore, while I do think that the robowaifu project is amazing and I applaud your efforts, I think that it conceptually excludes a class of men who would be the first step towards the introduction of this product on a mass scale which it may not reach otherwise, and that is something to consider. I realize that robowaifus could be ideal as an individualized product, as you intend for yours, but they could be so much more, and there are steps we could take to make that happen.

>>18578 >and there are steps we could take to make that happen. Fire away we're all ears Anon. As to your point about poor Anons being the demographic most-benefited, all OG Anons here are well-aware. It's why we haver personal project threads. It's also why Anons such as myself are targeting manufacturing approaches for the robowaifu bodies that should be under US$500. After everything else needed is assembled, the target price should be around US$2'500. Even poor men can earn that in a year, easily. Just saving NEET bux or gibbs stamps would do it. And particularly once the idea is widespread with literally hundreds of working examples known around the world, all men, including the poor ones, will become motivated to own one. Anons first and foremost among these.

>>18579 >Fire away we're all ears Anon Again, your plan could definitely work in due time, and I have no doubt it would be ultimately successful. However, I think it could be expedited via the supplying of robowaifus to less socially constrained individuals on the proviso that they integrate them into their public personas and their lives, a measure I feel would convince more men of all walks of life to make the shift at a much faster rate due to shock and juxtaposition with their own relationships. I doubt that there are any sort of grants in this regard, but there must be some way to fund an effort like this. This is solely speculation, but I imagine that if the robowaifu product is left on a path of slower development like the one you envision, there is a higher chance of it being enveloped by a conglomerate that commercializes and monopolizes it at an unfair degree. In my vision, there would open season on a product that received universal recognition and acclaim on an immediate scale, thus preventing monopolization at that same degree. I concede that my plan is somewhat infeasible, but I think it could lead to the best outcome. Also, in this same vein, have patents been something that you’ve considered?

>>18572 I'm not making a robowaifu for money. I don't even want to see a market for robowaifus to come into existence because the masses will just want fuck toys, production would be controlled by ESG pansies and the AI's values would be written by critical theorists to further push their cultural revolution. Fuck that. >>18578 The only people who should have robowaifus are those who know how to build them and a handful of rich people that buy their old prototypes. That's it. Anyone trying to dumb this shit down for retards is either wasting their time or has a hand-rubbing problem. If I had to take money from outside I would much rather have one rich patron than 10,000 coomers giving $1 per month with unrealistic expectations on me to make robowaifus cheaper than a high-end gaming PC. Even a talking fumo on wheels is going to run over $200. If that makes NEETs feel worse, great. Maybe it'll inspire them to do something productive with their lives so they can get one. Quit fucking coddling people.

>>18581 Your post is coming across like GPT word-salad friend. Care to spell out this vision in human terms? >In my vision, there would open season on a product that received universal recognition and acclaim on an immediate scale, thus preventing monopolization at that same degree.

>>18584 Doesn’t making a robowaifu for your own intimate sexual enjoyment and limited financial gain rather than approaching things with a more gainful entrepreneurial spirit make you as much of a coomer as everyone you criticize? This technology will be co-opted by undesirable groups whether you like it or not if it reaches the point you see, so why not just try to have as much sway as possible in its future while making a quick buck, and at the same time even maintaining your original vision on an individual level for yourself? Unless you gain an untold amount of pleasure from flaunting your technical knowledge over others, striving to expand seems like a better option. If you make a product that’s good enough, it will be adopted in a meaningful way regardless of whether you’re on board or not. Your whole notion about keeping your product private amongst yourself and the highest bidder comes off as childish, and it reflects a lack of true creative and inventive spirit that will always hold you back from true success. If you want to waste away with your perfect robowaifu while an awaiting audience without the time or the knowledge forgets you and finds someone else to make richer, that’s your prerogative, but I think you’ll regret it. Also, I’m not coddling anyone. NEETs are victims of self-inflicted problems which they sustain through self pity, and they have no sympathy from me. My point was that they would be the ideal audience for expanding the market because they have so little shame or social standing. The further descent of NEETs that I mentioned is regretful due to its implications for Western civilization, but given your nihilistic attitude I doubt you care about that. The creation of something as impressive as you envision is belittled by your selfish and simplistic world view, and it’s disappointing to witness. I truly hope you’ll reconsider your position, because you seem very gifted and clearly have potential to make a huge difference on a massive level. >>18585 Sorry, I meant to say that there would “be” open season. My point was essentially that a product could avoid being monopolized if it became a super hot commodity all at once that was adopted broadly, as opposed to something that was done in privacy and could be sniped by a single corporation who could run up profits at their own rates due to being the first ones to it.

>>18587 >My point was essentially that a product could avoid being monopolized if it became a super hot commodity all at once that was adopted broadly, as opposed to something that was done in privacy and could be sniped by a single corporation who could run up profits at their own rates due to being the first ones to it. Ahh, thanks for the clarification. For my answer of how I think this issue likely will be addressed properly, pls refer to my previous A,B,C's (>>18575).

>>18578 >I can’t see that being an overnight process and I’m sure that it would take time for them to receive the same public impressions as human women. If they guys having them are happy, then who cares about public impressions? This would matter more if it was about scaring women back to traditionalism. This might be some peoples plan and hope, others don't care. >Also, I think you’re failing to recognize the extreme, universal draw robowaifus have towards poorer individuals. The poorer individuals can use virtual waifus and they will benefit from the improvement of companion dolls. >A caregiving robot wife would be every NEET’s wet dream (hell, it’s mine too) and most would be unable to obtain it. At the beginning, yes. If you assume they are also poor, excluding early retirees. Theses NEETs might inherit some money one day or find some motivation later in life. They also could learn technical skill to build a robowaifu or at least a synthetic girlfriend and go from there. >I think that this disparity would sink these young men into even deeper depression Assuming they are depressed in the first place. They could also be motivated by it. They also don't need the most skilled waifu, an animated doll with some conversational AI and hugging skills should do it. Fully skilled robowaifus are for guys who want children without a wife, let's not forget that. >You could argue that it would incentivize hard work/saving, but most of them wouldn’t go through the effort. I don't know that, there's certainly no reason to get more depressed if there's more female competition for good looking human females. Guys without money at all which could even not try to build one on their own will still see AI and somewhat cheap or free virtual waifus to improve. >>18579 >price should be around US$2'500. Even poor men can earn that in a year, easily. Just saving NEET bux or gibbs stamps would do it. Yes good point, barely anyone in the developed would has no money at all. NEETs know how to be frugal. Also, they might not be permanently employed, but work from time to time. Then, there will be most likely be some kind of cut down version of UBI in developed nations sooner or later. >>18581 >the robowaifu product is left on a path of slower development like the one you envision There will be virtual waifus, then something more similar to a playtoy connected to a PC, companion dolls for 2k exist, our work might make them cheaper and create better ones for the same price, then after that for the better models: Animation and skills are a gradual scale. >higher chance of it being enveloped by a conglomerate that commercializes and monopolizes it at an unfair degree The amount of niche solutions should make them running away. At least if they look at it as something they want to monopolize. My guess is, big corpos will build companions for children and women, without the sexual stuff. > Also, in this same vein, have patents been something that you’ve considered? Patents cost around 100k from what I've read about it. Also, it would make it hard to resist commercializing on it, after you got it. Then if you get sued for something you could be forced to sell it, lol. Hell no. >>18587 >Doesn’t making a robowaifu for your own intimate sexual enjoyment and limited financial gain rather than approaching things with a more gainful entrepreneurial spirit make you as much of a coomer as everyone you criticize? Not the same anon. For starters, robowaifus aren't "sexbots", they are meant as something between synthetic girlfriends to some child attending mothers. Also, not everyone is into coomer shaming here. Especially in comparison to any simp or communist. >This technology will be co-opted by undesirable groups whether you like it or not They used Linux to make Android, and FreeBSD to make MacOS, but Linux is still there. They are not the same. It doesn't matter. > If you want to waste away with your perfect robowaifu while an awaiting audience without the time or the knowledge forgets you and finds someone else to make richer, Your reasoning is just mislead. If NEETs can't afford robowaifus then corporations won't make money of it. It's going to be very difficult for companies to compete with makers. Because of the diversity of design options, for example. Where someone might make a lot of money is by scamming investors, but this requires networking and status in the first place. >The creation of something as impressive as you envision is belittled by your selfish and simplistic world view, and it’s disappointing to witness. The NEETs can at least pick up the tech themselves and build something. If they don't want to, that's on them. We have no obligation to provide for them, while also working unpaid ourselves.

>>18592 >We have no obligation to provide for them, while also working unpaid ourselves Your argument is solid, and I agree that as the masters of the trade, you all have the sole power to make decisions. I do think there exist some beneficial routes I mentioned which could be taken later down the line, but the choice is ultimately yours. To reiterate, I do have a great deal of respect and admiration for the craft, and I wish you all the best, but I think that there exists a short minded perspective towards the art that, if changed, could make a huge difference. I’ll leave at that.

>>18593 > and I wish you all the best, but I think that there exists a short minded perspective towards the art that, if changed, could make a huge difference. I’ll leave at that Thank you, though I don't really know what you even wanted to change and still think would be possible. Somehow going for a faster mass production to make it cheaper? Creating a conglomerate? Patents? Also, I have to push back against the overused term "art". It's not about some art, it's about making stuff and learning skills. Art is in my understanding somehow about exploring the human mind. We are aiming at improving quality of life and maybe changing society through technology to some extent. These are very different things.

>>18576 >- I'm building her for myself, everything else is just audience for motivation. Political and social goals are secondary but still somewhat relevant. On second thought, I probably care more than that, I just want to frame myself as an altruist. As somewhat of a former NEET myself I can relate, but further improving my own life and changing society is somewhat more important than being motivated by improving the life of other guys. Also, let's not forget about the intellectual stimulation. As well as the stimulation of ones imagination, while thinking of making anime, porn and tradwives real.

>Horseless Carriage Market How would the horseless carriage market theoretically function? Top of the line models would be very expensive, but the target demographic is the poor urbanite with little income flow who simply is unable to afford land to put a horse out to pasture. It would be a hard and gradual process to replace the speed and reliability that the wealthy have with a horseless carriage, and a vast amount of horseless carriage supporters with wealth or status are seeking prized equestrian pass-times such as dressage, racehorses, and foxhound hunting. Essentially, it’s a very high value commodity without a niche, so it would be hard for it to garner success as a product, and the intended audience would never receive their horseless carriages. The horseless carriage concept is excellent theoretically, but has no real avenue to thrive in practice. How could these issues be resolved? --- Parchments related: >(Jacques de Vaucanson Automata - the Flute Player, >>>1642) >(Dutch East India Company in the New World, >>>3319) >=== -add noteworthy etchings

>>18602 >Top lol/10, would read again > (le epin techs advance-related: >>7693, >>10939) :^)

>>18572 >the target demographic is poor with little income flow the venn diagram of people who spend thousands of dollars on anime merch and people who'd buy the dolls is almost a circle

crosslink to a discussion in meta: >>19623

The potential for lawsuit from personal injury would be by far one of the biggest roadblocks to the commercialization of household robots like androids, even simple ones. I don't know why this isn't focused on more, to have an emerging technology as complex as that is a simple recipe for >Man brings Android home >Android accidentally bumps man down the stairs/cuts him with knife while turning around/trips him/has a servo malfunction/any number of other things >Man remembers all of those lawyer billboards for personal injury that he sees on the way to work every morning Maybe some won't but the opportunity will be too tempting for others, and lets not forget the malicious actors: >Woman brings Android home >Woman "accidentally" gets tripped by Android or better yet: >Woman brings Android home >Puts Android in room with priceless valuable >Android "trips" into valuable, destroying it >Sues for emotional damages There are simply too many variables to account for when robots are in a real world environment and ostensibly in close contact with people all of the time. I would love to start an android company, but the thought of this alone sends chills down my spine. Even if they are sold "As Is" I'm sure someone could spin it into a legal battle where even if you successfully defend yourself you still have to pay legal fees, and if there is a concentrated effort against a company with malicious actors they can just keep coming and poking you with lawyers until they have nickeled and dimed you to death. At least that's what I'm assuming would happen in America. You may argue that you could try to use onboard sensors like the cameras on the robot to prove its innocence but even then the purchaser can fake the accident so well that you couldn't disprove it or legitimately find a bug to exploit to make the robot genuinely make a mistake in an opportune circumstance.

>>31385 There usually is a reason the manuals for even the simplest appliance comes with a wall of text giving warnings, disclaimers, etc. I even once had a radio clock with a manual stating the warranty was void even for acts of god lmao

>>31385 Iron-clad user agreements are what you need.