Theory: Apple + Disney = Robots

[_apple_apple_]

First off — Apple will never buy Disney because it doesn't need to. The two companies can be best friends without an acquisition.

Some establishing points:

• Having a personal/family robot sounds excessive and spoiled, but I see it as no different from all the other machines/tools we use to make our lives easier, like kitchen appliances, washing machine, cars, etc. I'm not going to fault people for wanting to use tools, nor opting to not use a tool. I do agree that bossing around a person/robot runs the risk of changing people in potentially toxic ways.
• The pricing for these new androids/robots is not as bad as I thought it would be, and I'm sure the price will drop fast as it evolves. I'm not a fan of subscription models, but a leasing/instalment plan is pretty normal. Point being, wide-spread affordability is not impossible. All it takes is people willing to pay.
• Wise companies are not going to just stick a MM-LLM into their robot's brain and call it a day. The brain software is critical, if it can't do basic tasks reliably, the whole thing is a dud. It's a massive software project but I trust it can be done.
• Apple is aware that tech-at-home is a valuable space to dominate, largely because of the hub aspect. So far, Apple's been targeting media-related smart-home devices, but there are some recent patents about a robot home assistant. Ecosystem is king, and presumably a robot assistant would be connected to everything.
• Apple would likely leverage their own robotics to wean off of (slave) labor.
• Trusting robots (privacy and safety) is a long-standing issue that fiction has explored. Apple tries very hard to earn and keep this trust, which gives them a non-negligible market edge. In other words, people would probably give Apple the benefit of the doubt if they launched a robot assistant.

Main point:

• Disney has amazing animatronics, both hardware and software. If this could be turned into a product in some way, it would make a lot of money for them. I'm sure making the robots stand-alone (no umbilical) can be done.
• Disney personally has many uses for robots internally, so they are already interested in development. Yes this would displace some human workers but robots have always been destined/intended to do that.
• Apple has resources and go-to-market knowledge/connections that Disney needs, and Disney has robotics knowledge that Apple needs.
• A joint venture between Apple and Disney to develop a consumer robot makes a lot of sense. Both would be committed to developing an appealing robot with a lot of charm and ability, which in my opinion is what makes/breaks the product. This is not necessarily human-shaped, it could just be about the emoting/personality.

Apple certainly could do it all on their own, but with Disney (and their patents), a superior product could probably be developed in less time.

------
P.S. I'm still 50/50 on whether countries will straight up ban androids for all the obvious reasons.

 

[Pakaku]

First time I've heard about Disney trying to sell consumer robots. Animatronics and "internal robots" don't really sound very valuable to an everyday consumer in a way that Apple would care about pursuing, compared to anything software/computer-related they tend to do.

 

[_apple_apple_]

First time I've heard about Disney trying to sell consumer robots. Animatronics and "internal robots" don't really sound very valuable to an everyday consumer in a way that Apple would care about pursuing, compared to anything software/computer-related they tend to do.

Disney would not be selling the robots, Apple would be. Disney would just get a cut in lieu of patent licensing fees or something. Disney's non-monetary gain is the maturation of the tech, lower costs via production scale, and probably small things like the robot equivalent of the Mickey Mouse watchface.

It's no secret that the main use case for robots is labour/entertainment. Disney's main use for robots would be entertainment, to replace CGI characters in some cases (like they have done already with Grogu and Groot) on screen and of course at their parks. Apple's main use case (besides being a product) would be to design/build/deploy specialized robots to replace aspects of their assembly process. Apple is weird in that they pride themselves on fancy production tech but also use problematic human labour (admittedly in high-tech facilities).

Apple only abandoned the autonomous car project because vision AI/ML isn't good enough yet, and the risk of user-harm/bad-experience is too high. I don't think the risk profile for a home robot is quite as bad (if the bar is low), and the tech has broader viable use cases.

I do think Tim Cook is too risk-adverse to pursue development of a robot. I could see Craig trying if it was his call.

 

[ThunderSkunk]

Apple will never dominate in home/personal androids, bc there is no way they will make one that can also act as a sexbot. Everyone else will.

 

[_apple_apple_]

Apple will never dominate in home/personal androids, bc there is no way they will make one that can also act as a sexbot. Everyone else will.

Getting a robot past the uncanny valley is difficult and likely expensive. I think one or two companies will rise up and compete in that space. I could see Musk trying to own that market as an anti-prude/censorship/freedom statement.

Apple, Samsung, etc, will probably stay away from the uncanny valley. But I could see Samsung exploring sex-bots under a different brand.

 

[ThunderSkunk]

I dont see as big of a market for androids that are specifically sexbots or that rely on biomimicry like the current trend of sex dolls do. That would require dedicated investment on the part of the owner & come with difficult & tedious social stigma. Just like the dolls, you’ve now spent all that money, but have a model built for one purpose, and you have to hide it from your guests & neighbors. Instead I think more commonly, any home/personal androids designed to keep ones household running, maintain the car, feed the plants/water the dog etc would also care for the owners physical & mental health maintenance throughout the human lifespan, of which sexual health is a significant part. & like any consumer product, the most successful on the market will be designed sleek & attractive enough that theres no need to cross the uncanny valley. There are already plenty of non-human things people use for that purpose, which they find visually appealing enough without having to look human. But I think even when that is just one feature in a glossy sleek personal assistant droid, and becomes the norm, Apple will still try to prevent it and the sales (& funding) will go to the competition in Japan, etc. The Apple droid could end up as the choice of jealous married couples, or the US’s puritanical anti-sexuality demographic. I think sex work won’t be the defining feature of the more successful droids that include the feature set, but it will define those without it, so I’d be very surprised if Apple becomes competitive without a fundamental shift to a more mature view on content.

 

[_apple_apple_]

I dont see as big of a market for androids that are specifically sexbots or that rely on biomimicry like the current trend of sex dolls do. That would require dedicated investment on the part of the owner & come with difficult & tedious social stigma. Just like the dolls, you’ve now spent all that money, but have a model built for one purpose, and you have to hide it from your guests & neighbors. Instead I think more commonly, any home/personal androids designed to keep ones household running, maintain the car, feed the plants/water the dog etc would also care for the owners physical & mental health maintenance throughout the human lifespan, of which sexual health is a significant part. & like any consumer product, the most successful on the market will be designed sleek & attractive enough that theres no need to cross the uncanny valley. There are already plenty of non-human things people use for that purpose, which they find visually appealing enough without having to look human. But I think even when that is just one feature in a glossy sleek personal assistant droid, and becomes the norm, Apple will still try to prevent it and the sales (& funding) will go to the competition in Japan, etc. The Apple droid could end up as the choice of jealous married couples, or the US’s puritanical anti-sexuality demographic. I think sex work won’t be the defining feature of the more successful droids that include the feature set, but it will define those without it, so I’d be very surprised if Apple becomes competitive without a fundamental shift to a more mature view on content.

Even if Apple avoids sexual capabilities and bio-mimicry, I think there's still enough of a market (home/office). I agree that any company that leans into the sexbot angle will probably do well (if the quality is there).

But just to get back to the thread's main point; rather than do it alone, Apple should leverage Disney's robotics expertise in the development of a home assistance android, before it's too late.