u/Puzzleheaded_Pool578

https://preview.redd.it/txabak027l1h1.png?width=790&format=png&auto=webp&s=358649359f2d7d7bfd1bdd3fd02c26838ff14dc8

(the following was written without the use of CHATGPT, etc.)

Hello:

The automatic art easel is a custom made, adjustable tool for artists, created by woodworker Neils Verhaar. Though not a robot in the typical sense, it is an example of how ‘Non-Humanoid Robot” tech can be used to improve various areas of our society - in this case, the Art Sector. (Link Here)

This share is In promotion of our campaign to ‘STOP Elon Musk or Tesla (or any company) from releasing HUMANOID ROBOTS.’

Sincerely,

Michael Christensen-

https://preview.redd.it/ro1yutkw980h1.jpg?width=929&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8687de64a5f4b2833055a86737f6dcc0626571fc

(The following article was written without the use of ChatGPT, etc.)

Hello

 

There has been another ‘real world’ Humanoid Robot citing in the US. On the first of May, a Humanoid called ‘Benji’ was seen randomly walking down the street in Baltimore, Maryland. 

 

This Baltimore sighting brings the total of State-by-State sightings to SIX - in the last 24 months (California, Texas, Michigan, New York, Washington DC, and [now] Maryland.)

Though these Humanoids represent a handful of distinct companies, the general aim of these street sightings is clear: to slowly ease these tools into our lives. 

 

It’s hard to tell whether the manufacturers are hoping to minimally scare the public - or whether they, the people who manufacturer these robots, feel the need to be tentative in the great unveiling specifically because they aren't confident in the long term ramifications of their creation. I suspect all of the above.

Sincerely,

Michael Christensen-

https://preview.redd.it/ibgdgqza980h1.jpg?width=929&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7241659ed3e2d3b46db1d39e265ca1973768ca4f

(The following article was written without the use of ChatGPT, etc.)

Hello

 

There has been another ‘real world’ Humanoid Robot citing in the US. On the first of May, a Humanoid called ‘Benji’ was seen randomly walking down the street in Baltimore, Maryland. 

 

This Baltimore sighting brings the total of State-by-State sightings to SIX - in the last 24 months (California, Texas, Michigan, New York, Washington DC, and [now] Maryland.)

Though these Humanoids represent a handful of distinct companies, the general aim of these street sightings is clear: to slowly ease these tools into our lives. 

 

It’s hard to tell whether the manufacturers are hoping to minimally scare the public - or whether they, the people who manufacturer these robots, feel the need to be tentative in the great unveiling specifically because they aren't confident in the long term ramifications of their creation. I suspect all of the above.

Sincerely,

Michael Christensen-

(the following was written without the use of CHATGPT, etc.)

Hello:

In promotion of our campaign to ‘STOP Elon Musk or Tesla (or any company) from releasing HUMANOID ROBOTS’ - I’m highlighting examples of how our modern technologies can be used to serve humanity. 

MIT has developed a Middle School curriculum called, “How to Train Your Robot” - and it provides a special emphasis on the ethical considerations and economic trade-offs that naturally arise from the use of these tools. 

Trust is inescapably at the heart of our advanced automation dilemma - in other words, it’s easier to build an exceptional robot than it is to use it fairly. 

This MIT developed curriculum aims to cultivate this wisdom in a practical manner.

Sincerely,

Michael Christensen-

https://preview.redd.it/xetbq3zr5dxg1.png?width=1869&format=png&auto=webp&s=a4717c99f8d16a937a7ee5d6d3339f5bbb292c8f

(the following was written without ChatGPT, etc.)

 

(A 2 Minute Read)

 

Hello

 

In the weekly released “Moonshots" podcast on YouTube - hosted by entrepreneur and (so-called) ‘AI’ advocate Peter H. Diamandis - I heard an important remark that I wanted to address. Dr. Wissner-Gross - a regular panelist - said that the various movements to STOP AI (and petitions like ours) are unavoidably self-defeating. 

If, he argues, groups like ours succeeded in stopping a company from producing AI / robots, etc., then other groups would quickly jump in to fill the gap. And not only this - but in the absence of fewer competitors, these new groups might have access to more funding and opportunity and thus develop the tools faster.

On the one hand, I find it difficult to - even in principle - argue with this point. It seems Dr Wissner-Gross is merely stating an observable fact of free market economics. 

On the other hand, however, I think his own argument quietly bears its own self-defeating quality. Free Market economics is not SIMPLY peer pressure to win - Free Market economics is peer pressure to win at producing something that PEOPLE NEED. 

In theory, the reason why we tolerated the ‘Robber Barons’ of the last century - is because they were able to produce something that the rest of us could use. They made our lives a fraction of a percent more convenient, so we each gave them a fraction of our income - which combined to substantiate their fortune. 

But in the case of the market dominance of the so-called AI, it seems like there is ONLY the peer pressure to win in the abstract - and it is totally divorced from the need to provide a useful tool to the public. At best, it seems their race is to determine which company will have the power to determine what the public might need. 

In reality, it may be more like an ant death spiral - where an ant found some kernel of food, got lost when trying to return to his home with it, and then all the ants somehow began to follow him as he went in circles towards his deadly exhaustion.  

From this perspective, the establishment of boundaries and common terms could actually help to settle this fervor - and do so to an extent that might surprise technologists and their advocates. Why? Because it would establish the terms of a marketplace that provides actual goods and services. 

Thank you for signing and sharing our petition.

Sincerely,

Michael Christensen

https://preview.redd.it/29419eka5dxg1.png?width=1869&format=png&auto=webp&s=a68bdc0242ec537ed9d749d3cf2093a4f7db43dd

(the following was written without ChatGPT, etc.)

(A 2 Minute Read)

Hello

In the weekly released “Moonshots" podcast on YouTube - hosted by entrepreneur and (so-called) ‘AI’ advocate Peter H. Diamandis - I heard an important remark that I wanted to address. Dr. Wissner-Gross - a regular panelist - said that the various movements to STOP AI (and petitions like ours) are unavoidably self-defeating. 

If, he argues, groups like ours succeeded in stopping a company from producing AI / robots, etc., then other groups would quickly jump in to fill the gap. And not only this - but in the absence of fewer competitors, these new groups might have access to more funding and opportunity and thus develop the tools faster.

On the one hand, I find it difficult to - even in principle - argue with this point. It seems Dr Wissner-Gross is merely stating an observable fact of free market economics. 

On the other hand, however, I think his own argument quietly bears its own self-defeating quality. Free Market economics is not SIMPLY peer pressure to win - Free Market economics is peer pressure to win at producing something that PEOPLE NEED. 

In theory, the reason why we tolerated the ‘Robber Barons’ of the last century - is because they were able to produce something that the rest of us could use. They made our lives a fraction of a percent more convenient, so we each gave them a fraction of our income - which combined to substantiate their fortune. 

But in the case of the market dominance of the so-called AI, it seems like there is ONLY the peer pressure to win in the abstract - and it is totally divorced from the need to provide a useful tool to the public. At best, it seems their race is to determine which company will have the power to determine what the public might need. 

In reality, it may be more like an ant death spiral - where an ant found some kernel of food, got lost when trying to return to his home with it, and then all the ants somehow began to follow him as he went in circles towards his deadly exhaustion.  

From this perspective, the establishment of boundaries and common terms could actually help to settle this fervor - and do so to an extent that might surprise technologists and their advocates. Why? Because it would establish the terms of a marketplace that provides actual goods and services. 

Thank you for signing and sharing our petition.

Sincerely,

Michael Christensen

https://preview.redd.it/y4bx3yt2izvg1.png?width=947&format=png&auto=webp&s=7d13c4e7d44ef35fd9707e721b361952733e2bd5

(the following was written without ChatGPT, etc.)

Hello

There’s been another sighting of a Humanoid Robot - and it was especially demoralizing. On March 25, 2026 in Washington DC - the First Lady of the United States was seen walking alongside a Humanoid Robot at a press conference.

In this bizarre spectacle, the First Lady theorized about how this variety of robot - and ‘so-called’ AI - might be used to educate our nation's children. The event - and the First Lady’s theories - seemed to come and go in our public awareness without much scrutiny. But this event was too silly to not confront - even if it’s not clear where to begin. Though I’m feeling like a ‘broken record,’ here are a few of the usual points: 

(1) These ideas are oblivious to the growing insights on child psychological development - and the need for children to interact with people - and to do so away from screens; (2) the relationship between the government and the education of our youth is already a tenuous, ongoing negotiation - this seemingly doofy public statement is indicative of an absolute, Code Red worst case scenario in this ongoing negotiation; (3) it was an idea presented with virtually no self-awareness or healthy skepticism; (4a) it is expected that a handful of companies will dominate the entire robotic / so-called AI industry in ten years - thus she’s advocating for a handful of companies to control the entire education system; (4b) even in the best case scenario, the quality of these advanced tools fluctuate as they progress - as well as at the whims of the companies who make them.

This was some absolute absurdism. 

Thank you for promoting our petition - and signing. 

Sincerely,

Michael Christensen-

https://preview.redd.it/zzvm10exynug1.png?width=536&format=png&auto=webp&s=15d1088c91e5862165a3a51960c65bb4a75b887e

(the following was written without the use of CHATGPT, etc.)

Hello:

In promotion of our campaign to ‘STOP Elon Musk or Tesla (or any company) from releasing HUMANOID ROBOTS’ - I took on the challenge to find a non-humanoid dish cleaning robot that could automate the entire dish cleaning process (from "scrubbing to storage"). I admit that this was a fairly straightforward Google Search.

Whatever the case, Armstrong Robotics has developed working models of this type of robotics system. In fact - an Armstrong Robotics dish-cleaning system can do MORE dishes than a humanoid robot counterpart in the same amount of time. 

Now - the Armstrong Robotics dish washing system is intended for use in restaurants. Not homes. Nevertheless, the technology is there - and it stands to reason that at some point in the future, this technology could be modified for domestic use in a cost effective fashion. For the right price, this could probably be done now. 

I view this as strong evidence that Humanoid Robots are not essential for domestic labor.

Thank you for taking the time to sign and share this petition. - and thanks to Redditor u/StrangeFisherman345 who inspired this post.

Sincerely,

Michael Christensen- 

(The following was written without ChatGPT, etc.)

 

The 'ISSUE' statement on our Change[dot]org campaign has been updated. Here it is copied below:

 

***

Why STOP Humanoid Robots?

Humanoid Robots are totally unnecessary, from a utilitarian point of view.

Industry insiders openly admit these robots have primarily become a means of enticing funding opportunities - and their manufacturers hope to use them to gain dominance in the burgeoning, so-called ‘AI’ industry.

Nevertheless, Humanoid Robots will be given extraordinary, universal capability. 

On the whole, our belief is that these Humanoid Robots perfectly embody how powerful our modern tools can become - along with the short-sightedness of our vision for them.

What is at Stake if We Don’t Stop Humanoid Robots?

They could further isolate people from their community; inhibit our ability to find meaning; exacerbate our reliance on technology – and the systems that maintain them; and reduce the intellectual and physical development of our populace. 

 

Isn’t ‘AI’ More Dangerous Than Humanoid Robots?

It’s not obvious which version of our modern tech will be more - or less - dangerous.
This said, we believe that the rationale behind the ‘Humanoid Robot’ invention is, at best, so ill-considered and spectacle driven that it presents the more clear and present danger. 

 

Do we HATE Elon Musk?

No. Absolutely not. 

In fact, Mr Musk has been outspoken in his caution for the Humanoid Robot industry. His position seems to be that he’d rather ‘steer the ship’ than be a passenger. 

Our position, then, is that when it comes to Humanoid Robots - he and his colleagues are steering the ship in a bad direction. 

 

What Evidence Do You Have to Support Your Concern?

(Qualitative) Industry insiders openly acknowledge that the ‘Humanoid Robots’ have become a sales tactic to engage donors on the vision of automated workforce. (link)

(Qualitative) Robot dogs are being used to patrol AI data centers - this is a strong indication for how Humanoid Robots will be used for defensive / security purposes in the future. (link)

(Quantitative) Hyper advanced technologies tend to isolate people and remove daily resistance (link)

(Qualitative / Quantitative) Modernity is no guarantee of a healthy or prosperous society: despite the extraordinary achievements since the industrial revolution, history has shown that whether due to the tendency of wealth to spread unequally between people or our inability as humans to make the most of what we have, we are infertile (link), depressed (link), and – broadly speaking – unsatisfied (link). 

Won’t Humanoid Robots Bring in the “Age of Abundance”?

There is nothing inherent in a vision for a prosperous society that specifically requires Humanoid Robots.

Furthermore, we believe that tools can only serve a vision for a prosperous society - and are not at the core of this vision.

 

Aren’t Humanoid Robots Pathetic? They Just Fall Over Themselves!

Currently, yes. Humanoid Robots are basically expensive puppets. 

But - with continual improvements in so-called, ‘AI’ and autonomous controls, this will change drastically. 

(the following was written without the use of CHATGPT, etc.)

Hello:

The campaign to ‘STOP Elon Musk or Tesla (or any company) from releasing HUMANOID ROBOTS’ is secondary to the implementation of more promising automation. Here is an example of more encouraging automation in development: 

Glacier robotics has produced a robot - augmented by some variety of neural network - that can rapidly sort recyclable materials from garbage. Throughout the country, local governments are implementing inefficient programs that ask citizens to recycle. But THIS robot would keep all the recycling responsibility to the company that takes in the garbage. 

Thank you for taking the time to sign and look at our petition.

Sincerely,

Michael Christensen-