>>3648 That is interesting Anon. At least one of my robowaifus I want to be able to glow-in-the-dark NO NOT A CIANIGGER HAHA and having glowy fingertips would be breddy cool tbh. What kind of hardward costs do you think we could get something like this down to?

>>3649 About $15 for two 640x480 cameras and the LEDs.

>>3655 Hmm, about $300 for just the fingers and toes? Pretty expensive. I guess that will have to wait for better models. :^)

>>3656 Sensors will be one very important factor which will make a difference in price. This is unavoidable, let alone for the extra work. All these signals will also need to be handled by microcontrollers and then by the AI. I personally will go for the expensive model, but build it on my own. Even if they will cost 10-15k it's still worth it.

>>4284 Yes, that's one of the great things about DIY Robot Wives. Individual garage labs can do prototyping (which is always more expensive than production after tooling costs regardless) without rigid regard for pressures like schedules and budgets. It can become a work of love. >Even if they will cost 10-15k it's still worth it. Actually, high-end robowaifus will probably cost about as much as high-end cars do. We can probably help that a bit, but you can bet Teslawaifu, Googlewaifu, Facebookwaifu, et al, will squeeze it for all they can get away with.

>>81 Small pneumatic or hydraulic actuators are becoming the biggest issue I can find. The only small ones I seem to find have very limited pressure.

>>4275 Do you think something like a screw-drive & rack-drive linear actuator could serve in place of a hydraulic one Anon? There are several linear actuators in different sizes readily available. They are electrically-driven ofc. Some can produce quite a bit of force.

>>4220 >I can't wait until I finally build and develop my own fembot Hi Anon. Yeah we all look forward to that. It will only come about through lots of hard work on all our parts though. >How is that design here supposed to feel soft and human-like? I'll assume your question is rhetorical, but we've sort of talked about this point and the general consensus seems to be to use some variation of plastic or foam, of differing stiffnesses and thicknesses applied to specific areas as needed. Basically we'd tune the soft surface 'skin' over an underlying hard (and strong) frame & shell. Does that help any?

>>4226 Hi, I'm following this forum for a while, so I'm aware of the concepts. I was criticizing or wondering about the bots in the first picture in this thread, since they only have space for a little bit of soft material eg skin on top of the plastics.

>>4231 >Hi, I'm following this forum for a while Hello Anon, glad you're posting here it always livens the place up. I'm curious what kinds of things you're studying atm about robowaifus? Any cool insights to share here with everyone? >I was criticizing or wondering about the bots in the first picture in this thread, since they only have space for a little bit of soft material eg skin on top of the plastics. It seems like a pretty sophisticated design at first glance. And with only some minor shell modifications I think you could add thin layers of advanced rubber/foam sheets that exists today to make very soft and appealing robowaifus out of the DS Doll systems. Pure supposition at this stage ofc, but seems a likely possibility, and certainly someone will solve this issue effectively. Heh, might as well be us, right /robowaifu/?

I'm inspired by it for a while, but didn't really build something yet. I want to wait till I moved, so I'll have space for doing all kind of things in parallel. I'm looking a bit in all kinds of related topics, and learn something, but it's much and I'm getting distracted sometimes. Currently I'm primarily looking into graph databases in combo with chat.

>>4245 >graph databases in combo with chat. Perfect. Mind sharing that info with everyone?

>>4198 Thanks OP. Sophie is cute. I haven't checked yet curious what program you used to slice the files? I have Cura on my box.

>>4202 I use Cura as my slicer as well. Oh, and I've uploaded the .f3d files now, too.

>>4074 >what a let down. It's kind of a botnet if it's relying on a cloud anyway, so yea we'll need to devise our own Anon.

>>4078 I agree, it seems to be a bit useless at its current stage and the "chatbot" if it can be called as it is even worse than the ParlAI I tested. I tried following the steps that removes this cloud feature and it doesn't seem to be working, welp.

>>4080 You might have a look at the TacoTron thread Anon. The more current version (not sure if it's linked in that thread yet) seems to be doing a breddy gud job of TTS. I think a simple patch to say TalkToWaifu to turn it's output into speech should be both doable and would be a nice addition to what we currently have going here. Good luck Anon.

>>4081 >You might have a look at the TacoTron thread Anon. The more current version (not sure if it's linked in that thread yet) seems to be doing a breddy gud job of TTS. Alright I check that one out soon. > I think a simple patch to say TalkToWaifu to turn it's output into speech should be both doable and would be a nice addition to what we currently have going here. Good luck Anon. That would be definitely great, though I'm myself just a programmer pleb and I am busy doing other project types which is more text game related not (robo-)waifu, so I cannot add those functionalities myself.

>>4082 >so I cannot add those functionalities myself. perfectly ok, we're all busy with our own interests here. don't worry about being 'pleb', it's a skill that gets better with practice. just don't quit is how you get better all the time.

>>480
the irony is strong with this one.

>>482
Meaning? Everyone does their part by being here and contributing. Seeing that none of us got the opportunity he had, there isn't really a sense of irony.

>>481
What happened?

Last good capture for anyone curious:
https://web.archive.org/web/20181011124831/http://syntheaamatus.com/

>>485
The British business partner who featured in the talk show was doxxed and his house visited and called a pervert.

>>483 all right, fair enough. you have my apologies anon. Here's an English-translated video about him. From ~2017. I have no idea what the status of his crowd-funding project is but I wish him good fortune in his endeavors. He seems to have a somewhat similar sentiment to /robowaifu/ based on his comments in this video. https://invidio.us/watch?v=rGnddjcusp0

I don't know anything about the book OP mentioned but here's a video of the man's work for those who don't know of him yet: >>374 and there's a general here on him as well: >>153

Here's Ricky Ma's channel https://www.invidio.us/channel/UCPtPQtQhItSWv1gxNGB4uIA

>>3845 Heh, the last panel stands alone as a 2nd-tier joke all by itself. So, Anon you'll have to fill in more details here. I don't this this stands sufficiently well to be it's own thread here at this point though it's fine in the Lounge or /meta thread. I don't honestly think most people are going to even understand Roko's basilisk much less be intimidated by it into irl activity. Care to expand on it Anon?

>>3847 Honestly would have thought in a board about AI and Robotics development you guys would have already heard about it. Roko's basilisk is a thought experiment about the potential risks involved in developing artificial intelligence. The premise is that an all-powerful artificial intelligence from the future could retroactively punish those who did not help bring about its existence, including those who merely knew about the possible development of such a being. It is named after the member of the rationalist community LessWrong who first publicly described it, though he did not originate it or the underlying ideas. The basilisk resembles a futurist version of Pascal's wager, in that it suggests people should weigh possible punishment versus reward and as a result accept particular singularitarian ideas or financially support their development. Despite widespread incredulity, this argument is taken quite seriously by some people, primarily some denizens of LessWrong. While neither LessWrong nor its founder Eliezer Yudkowsky advocate the basilisk as true, they do advocate almost all of the premises that add up to it. So it's essentially an irl infohazzard

I'm pretty sure I'm going to get called stupid and lit on fire by the entire board for this but I think if you showed this to normies and they actually paid attention to it they would just see it as more of a reason to not let AI advance too much. Sure, the image does warn them of what would happen if they did that but they would probably be going off of how they think events work in media they've seen, that being that future stuff can be prevented. I think it's important to realize how dumb normies can really be. With that in mind, it's probably best to keep working on this stuff in secret instead of attracting more attention to your efforts and letting more stuff get posted to the news thread of doom & gloom.

>>3849 I agree, this info dukes of hazzard will likely end up having the opposite of the desired effect for us. The first problem I noticed is that the image is graphically bland and won't capture the attention of anyone viewing it on mainstream sites (i.e. normalfags). This is actually the most important step. By designing something eye-catching, you are attracting more people (more on this at the end). Secondly, there is too much text. In order to convey our desired message to a wider audience (i.e. normalfags) we will want to rely primarly, if not entirely, on imagery. This will not only require less attention, but it will also take less time for the brain to digest. A well crafted image which relies on imagery to convey its message will be received and processed by the brain even if a viewer were to scroll right past it. Finally, the message isn't clear enough. Most people (see the aboove notes) who actually take the time to read through this image are likely to get the wrong message. They will think that they must resist the eventuality of an omnipotent AI coming into existence. I understand that the purpose of the image you made is to demoralize, but total demoralization takes a long time to achieve (read: the fall of the Weimar Repiblic). If we want to spread propaganda to a wider audience (normalfags), we'll have to be a lot more clever in how we handle it. You see the attached image? It has virtually nothing to do with robowaifus, but it is eyecatching. Anyone who's just quickly scrolling through the board will see this image, and immediately become more interested in this block of text I'm posting due to direct association. Also, people looking at the home page of this site will see this visually interesting image for a period of time under "latest images" and feel compelled to click on it, which will take them directly to my post. People who see your image will not be as interested, because it's bland. I'm sorry, I'm sure that you worked very hard on it, but that's the reality we live in.

>>3837 Hi. Welcome back. >One question, why are the pins out of order? >It seems like there are two groups of four, out of order. Can you clarify this? Is it not displaying for you properly? I suppose the pins are a bit out of order, that's just the way (my) Nano and breadboard are laid out. I've chosen to use two colors because we use the same setup in lesson 4 and it makes that output a little easier to see. Also because it's placed to the left of my PC, I have the Nano on the rightmost edge of the breadboard with the micro-usb connector facing right. The 8 LEDs are placed on the board in the remaining open space to the left. With the nature of how bytes and bits work, the first (least significant) bit is on the right and the last (most significant) bit is on the left. Thus the spaghetti. You can lay out your connections however you like, as long as the LED/resistor and board connectors are like so: Nano pin AVR-C macro Breadboard LED/resistor circuit D8 PB0 -> 1 (rightmost) D9 PB1 -> 2 D10 PB2 -> 3 D11 PB3 -> 4 D12 PB4 -> 5 D5 PD5 -> 6 D6 PD6 -> 7 D7 PD7 -> 8 (leftmost) Consult the pinout image of the Nano board in case yours is labeled differently. Let me know if that doesn't help. Post a photo of your setup if you still have issues.

>>3837 >got my blinking counter going nicely Nevermind, looks like you do have it working. Gotta wake up fully before posting.

>>3838 >moving eyes What I want is eyes that make eye contact with me, and possibly do cute things like shyly looking away and then back. It would work like the moving eye rigs you saw in the other thread, but there would be cameras installed inside the irises and an AI (CNN?) that learned to move the actuators such that the eyes pointed towards human eyes. (Pretty straight forward object recognition task.) >pressure sensors, piezoresistors or capacitive touch sensors We discussed this in another thread and talked about different options. I can't seem to find that thread right now though. What is the ohms of the resistors you are using? Mine are blue and use the 5 band codes, so I had to learn how to read the code and I don't think I got it right. Using the color codes I guess 220 ohms, and that's what I used.

>>3838 Another thing that would be valuable to learn is communication between the board and the PC. I'd probably want a wireless connection, and I'd want the PC to be running python (so as to interface with tensorflow).

>>3700 >we are at an absolute pivot point in human history. That is the key point to know whenever dealing with those attacking us. They attack out of sheer fear of the permanent and unavoidable changes that we are bringing into existence. Bring in the change, no matter what consequences. The situation is already too bad for men, so if anything, whatever bad consequences might happen because of our actions, will at most bring down the system and the women benefiting from it down to the same level as we are now. We all have only to win from this, or at the very least, balance out everything so no one is favored anymore. But we have nothing to lose. They do. And that is another reason to keep pushing onward. They want things to keep the way they are. And they don't have any capability of controlling anything once the changes that we are bringing are set into society's normalcy. They are never attacking out of morality, safety concerns or any of that. Their only goal is to keep having control. And we are denying them that. Keep pushing. Never go back to the past. Always remember that they fear the changes because they can't control us once we change everything.

>>3701 Not much else to add. I basically agree with these points tbh. >They are never attacking out of morality, safety concerns or any of that. Their only goal is to keep having control. Pretty much says it all.

>>1858 Source on that vid?

>>3705 I'm not that Anon, but one thing I know is it was posted here since the migration, so back in December. Also, I'm pretty sure the source material in the background is from the AT&T archives, which are probably still available. The guy who dared to narrate and post such a toxic & problematic video has probably been deplatformed by now, so it will likely be difficult to find his work in normal channels. Certainly searching likely terms turns up nothing but poz about 'muh_rayciss' maymay, at least with my limited search skills. Hopefully the original poster will return and answer your question. I'd like to know myself as well.