Protection for me, but not for thee!

If that's what you think I'm "agitated" about, then man... You should go back and re-read it all.

I've said the article itself is garbage a number of times. I've never said anything against the fact that tech takes time. In fact, it's been my number one point as to WHY the article is garbage.

Have I said I had an issue outside of that? The article is garbage because of the headline and it's inference that this can all be done in that timeframe.

Beyond that, the headline is even MORE garbage because the researcher says nothing specifically about "robots". She talks about automation.

The best part is that in the article... And this really is the best part...

The researcher says essentially the exact same thing I did in my first comment.

Here's the quote:

> But she told the BBC that the expense of technology meant the use of household robots could also lead to “a rise of inequality in free time” - with only richer households able to afford the technology.

Huh... With only richer households able to afford the technology.

Tech absolutely does move faster, but to assume that we have ever gone from "nothing" to "viable enough in the modern middle-class home that it fully replaces tasks" is not a 10-year mark. Never has been.

Please point out where I have said that I object to mass adoption.

Seriously. Point it out. I wanna see where your disconnect is. Because all I have said... Since this has started... And I will say it again... Straight copy/pasted from my previous posts...

The idea that 40% of tasks in a home will be automated within the next 10 years is bullshit.

How does that equate to my objecting to mass adoption?

I think you may be struggling with what "commercially viable to the masses" means.

In 1984, when the Macintosh came out, less than 10% of homes had any version of what can be known as a PC.

I just used the examples you laid out, hoss.

Oh, and the PC isn't from the Industrial Revolution. And it still took nearly 40 years.

Here. Let's use something more modern. Self-driving cars. That's almost a thing now, right? Almost commercially viable? Probably what, 10-12 years away before it becomes possible on a mid-range sedan like the Ford Fusion?

Wanna know how long the self-driving car has been a theoretical "just around the corner" innovation? They've been talking about it since the mid-50's.

I need a whoosh gif for you. I really do.

I'll break it down for you here, step by step:

1. The article says that 40% of household tasks could be automated in 10 years.
2. I comment that the timeline is ludicrous because that tech this is going to be too expensive for this timeframe to be realistic.
3. You bring up 3 technologies that people said would be too expensive to own.
4. I show that all three examples of technology absolutely in no way went from hypothetical to middle-class reality within 3 generations, let alone 10 years.

So my point is, and I hope you've made it this far...

The idea that 40% of tasks in a home will be automated within the next 10 years is bullshit.

Yeah, an and it took about 50 years for washing machines to become "automated" and another 40 to become a household staple (post-WWII).

Dishwashers were invented in the 1850's, electric dishwashers were invented in the 1910's, and it took another 40 years until they became commercially viable to anyone that was not extremely wealthy. Same thing, post-WWII.

A modern (as we think of it today) PC was not viable to the middle class range until the mid-90's.

Shit, I grew up in the 80's and I can vividly remember seeing the price for a Macintosh in 1984 was $2500 not adjusted for inflation. That amounts to almost $7,200 today. The first computer in my house that my middle class parents could afford was the Tandy model in like 1988, and that was still like a grand at the time.

So yeah, sure. Push the timeframe out long enough and all technology will inevitably become commercially viable for the middle and even lower class.

But 10 years? Bruh. ChatGPT is out there right now saying that Walter Mondale beat Jimmy Carter in Democratic primary in the 1980 Presidential election.

I read articles like this, and all I can think of is adding, "for the uber-wealthy" to the end, because there is no damn way my wife and I, comfortably around 100k a year total could even begin to afford this kind of in-home tech.

Let alone folks who don't have even the small modicum of financial security we do.