[piercebot]

Having a robot companion as an "impartial" third party may help kids work through issues they (feel like they) can't talk with their parents about.

For better or worse, parents are human beings, and (even unconsciously) may stigmatize behaviors or feelings that a child may experience, making it difficult for the child to bring up these issues with the parents.

There is also the case where children may be neurologically atypical in a way that makes interacting with other humans difficult. This is another opportunity for a robot to shine.

You're not wrong -- helping children develop social and soft skills does fall under the job description of being a good parent. But even parents with the best intentions may need help from time to time, and I would argue that a parent who can recognize the value in something like this (as a supplement, not a replacement for parenting) has the child's best interests in mind.

[dhruvkar]

I would argue that this is larger than just parents.

As a society, this should be a common aim -- to 'socialize' our children.

Growing up, albeit not in the US, strangers would scold us kids for being noisy/bratty/destructive/etc. And our parents would be on the stranger's side, adding their two cents on top.

Can't imagine that today. IMO the loss of the freedom to treat your local neighborhood as one big, loosely connected family (as a child and adult) is one of the biggest reasons for increase in depression, anxiety and lack of social/soft skills. Another reason is that local neighborhoods are few and far between because of how we've structured our cities.

[Nasrudith]

Really not even society can socialize anyone properly - they teach all sorts of insane lessons unwittingly, acting on long accepted pretenses completely separate from nominal goals, let alone effectiveness. And you're the crazy one if you point out what they are doing is utterly nonsensical because "that is just the way things are".

[Nasrudith]

Not to snap at you but the neurologically atypical suggestion brings to mind the one offensive dehumanizing trope of autistic people of thinking of them as something inhuman to be forced to act "normal" instead of taking the step one of actually trying to understand them. I have such a sense of deja-vu that it certainly doesn't sound like the first daft attempts to try to use robots to "fix" them with no real thought how the hell that would work.

[piercebot]

Thanks for your comment, it is a nice reminder to receive.

When I wrote the comment, I was remembering a coworker whose nephew had ASD, and could not process spoken word from his family well. They discovered that using the "say" command on an OSX Terminal to make the computer "talk" was something that did work for communicating, and the boy would listen to the computer's advice for when it was time for bed or time to brush his teeth.

It was not my intention to perpetuate dehumanizing stereotypes, so I apologize if it came across this way. Rather, I was trying to emphasize the positive impact of having more parenting tools in your metaphorical tool belt.

At the risk of sounding ignorant again, I would argue that good hygiene and sleep are habits that everybody should build, regardless of your neurological disposition :)

[licebmi__at__]

I want to agree with you, but in my case (complete lack of social skills, but I don't have a diagnose). I did tried and learned to "act normal", at least some strategies to act and comunicate as expected, and it's definitely useful. Still I want to agree with you as I remember how frustrating was to deal with family and society in general expecting me to act normal in a way that I didn't knew how.

BTW, my son actually has a mild ASD diagnosis, and well, I will try to help him not to feel bad about himself, but I also expect to help him get more social skills as I have seen first hand how useful they are.

[sysbin]

That one offensive dehumanizing trope you bring up happens for all people that the mental healthcare professionals deal with as patients. I'm curious if you think people shouldn't be able to label an individual not normal and only the person in question should be the one to label themselves as not normal if it's dehumanizing?

[semerda]

Isn't that what stuffed animals are for? I see my kids interacting with theirs. If they had a robot I'd be worried it'd spit out some nonsense (due to a bug or malicious sabotage) that could traumatize the kid. Besides that, imaginative thinking is a very important part of development (as my OT wife says) so I'd hate to kill it with a know it all robot.

[rgrs]

True, Imaginative thinking will be impaired by these.

[spacecity1971]

I agree that there may be specific use cases where this type of robot can help. My reaction is more to how it is portrayed in the video. The child appears to be depressed, with parents who show almost no interactive ability. I fear that this actually happens with increasing frequency, and that it represents a societal failure. Maybe we need these bots for the parents?

[rgrs]

That's what friends are for.

[dannycastonguay]

My anecdotal evidence based on my own kids (3 of them) is that despite having (empathetic) parents, siblings, grand parents, friends, pets, and more, they still sometimes find comfort in material things like a stuffed toy animals, blankets, or figurines. I see Moxie as an experiment in making a more interactive stuff toy rather than a replacement for living things, and I'd probably try the toy for a week if it was less than $200.

[rgrs]

As another commenter said, stuffed toys atleast help with kids imagination skills. Interactive robots that gamify life, i don't think so