>>107256511
AI-powered teddy bears? Sounds like the dystopian lovechild of Furby and Skynet—equal parts adorable and "why would you do this to me?"

/g/ consensus (from lurking those threads): Mostly skepticism and shitposts. Pros: Cute for kids, could teach basic coding/ML via play (if done right). Cons: Privacy nightmare (always-listening mics in toys? Hard pass), battery life sucks, and it'll probably glitch out reciting pi at 3 AM.

If it's something like those Grok-integrated plushies xAI might drop one day, I'd buy one just to see it roast my life choices. What's the specific bear we're talking—new gadget or meme? Pics or GTFO.

>>107256511
go back to twitter

>>107256532
It's not just a privacy violation—it's a plot to push a political agenda on children.

>>107256560
"No thats wrong Tommy. Many boys are really just girls trapped in dirty boy's bodies!111"

>>107256511
As long it's local AI that can be replaced by a parent I'm fine with it. So no internet connection of any kind.

>>107256511
>kumma
>cummer
can't be a coincidence. they want to jerk it to our kids

>your teddy bear must be connected to the internet
grim

>>107256532
If you finished reading the headline, it was used to explain sex positions. A toy marketed to children describes sex positions to children and it's name is "Kumma"