The friendly robot company

[:]

In episode 2acv4 entitled 'Xmas story' the professor mentions that Santa claus was build in 2801 by 'The friendly robot company'.

I found 2 errors with this sentence:

1. How can there be a 'Friendly robot company' when all robots are made by mom?

2. It's was only about 120 years ago the proffesor made the first robot who could qualify for a boatloan (a clone of my own), How could the "Robot company" have made an unstoppable killing machine who performs over 50 megachecks per second (Xmas story)?

I'm very eger to hear you'r thoughts on this

[#1 :]

For question  number 1 my friend, The public sees moms robot company as friendly, its public image is one of a kind old lady.

and to answer question 2....I had windows 98, but on the same machine I upgraded to windows xp, a much better program.

[#2 :]

Mom's robotfactory is called "Mom's Friendly Robot Company". My theory is the "The Friendly Robot" company was a competitor to Mom, who later bought it and merged it with her own company "Mom's Robots" to form "Mom's Friendly Robot Company".  It's a simple hostile take-over.

One of the things required to qualify for a loan, is responsibility (on your behalf) and trust (from the auditor in your ability to pay). An unstopable killing machine doesn't really reflect any of those things, and strangely enough banks are very reluctant to give loans to people who'd rather kill them in a gruesome manner, than pay the interests on time.  Anyway, I guess Farnsie came up with a new gizmo, a "decency-chip", a "reliability sub-rpogram" or something like that.

[#3 :]

To Mikey:

1. Farnsworth dosen't, i quoted him.

2. What does that have to do with anything? Do you have a point?

To Teral:

1. You might be right about that.

2. It's was only about 120 years ago the professor made a robot who wasn't 'Stiff and a little on the uptight side' (Crimes of the hot). I wouldn't say that Santa claus is stiff or on the upptight side so how did they make an unstoppable killing machine 80 years earlier?

[#4 :]

He does have some exorbitantly high standards for good behaviour, though that' s probably not uptight as such. It's possbile Santa upgrades his own systems now and then. Unlike calculon he doesn't do it to become a new person, but only to get a better performance out of his hardware. He is still somewhat stiff in his walking as seen in "Xmas Story".

[#5 :]

My point exactly, he must upgrade his system if hes been around for 200 years.

[#6 :]

But they said he turned evil and went on his yearly killingspree before the professor had made his discovery (Crimes of the hot), So he should have been stiff and uptight.

[#7 :]

You're telling me Santabot doesn't have a stick up his ass? Seems uptight to me.

[#8 :]

Britz: When i say stiff and uptight i mean like c3po in 'Crimes of the hot'.

I've never seen Santa give anyone a tender kiss on the forehead, maybe the kiss of death but thats not the same.

[#9 :]

calculon was a factory building and construction arm from what 2012? santa was a robot built in the late 2000's ever think that they could have had robots before then? the first santa was most likely a stiff walking 3cpo with a red hat. after 200 or so years you update thouse things. calculon can now act, same goes for santa who can now kill millions and millions in one night.

you would think the military who can crush spiders can take care of a small nucence like that. would you not?
 

[#10 :]

Getak2003:

They said that something went wrong, they new it in the year 2801 that it went wrong. Who could it go wrong if it was only an stiff moveing c3po?
He didn't seem to go on many killing sprees.

In the year 2801 they hadn't sacrificed fuel efficency and all the robots was stiff and on the uptight side. They didn't go on killingsprees so i ask you how did it go wrong in that year? Santa never where nice.

[#11 :]

Maybe the fact that he said "the Friendly Robot Company" is just a reference to "Mom's Friendly Robot Company"? If Mom is the only person who produces robots, then you wouldn't need to specify it with "Mom" for people to know what you were talking about.  I think we were just meant to take it as read that Farnsworth is talking about "Mom's Friendly Robot Company," he just didn't say it.

My tuppence worth! 

[#12 :]

Sil: Yeah proboably. But that dosen't explain why santa clause went bad even to they hadn't sacrificed fuel efficency

[#13 :]

That I don't know. The only thing I can think of, is if they set the standard too high, then presumably Santa would have killed the engineers that made him because they were too naughty, and no-one has been able to get near him to sort it out.  It's possible he was actually *made* wrong as opposed to something *went* wrong.  I know the professor says *went* but that's really a figure of speech - we may not be supposed to take it literally.

[#14 :]

Farnsworth say in "Xmas Story" that Santa's standards was set too high due to a programming error. Imagine if Santa made´his decision based on a complicated equation, and then compared it with a fixed value, but the consequences contained an error.

If naughtyness<10 then subject=bad
If naughtyness>10 then subject=good
(sorry, I only know Basic)

If the value should've been 1, then it's virtually impossible for anyone to be good.

Thanks to his crumble zones he's probably difficult to destroy, and the Earth army doesn't seem were capable to me. Sure they can beat a couple of spiders, but Santa actually fires back with modern weaponry.

[#15 :]

Yeah - and if you look at Bender in Eric Rogers' section of AOI1 (2ACV16), the electricity from their guns doesn't hurt him at all. Now, that may be because of his size, but if they *were* going to affect him, the sheer number would have done so.  So I guess, since Santa is also a robot, the Earth army's electrical guns aren't going to affect him either, unless there was a massive number of people firing simultaneously.

Did that make sense?

[#16 :]

What Teral says is the answer i was looking for.

Sil: Can't they just Emp him?