• Dr. Coomer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Because. Also, flamethrower aren’t considered weapons by the government, so the only states that limits you from buying one is California and Ohio and Maryland banned them.

        • Dr. Coomer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Not a ban, a restriction. Like California, you need a permit. Sorry if I made that confusing.

          • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            7 months ago

            Ok new life goal. Be that guy at the DMV with a permit for a flamethrower arguing with the civil servant that “because it is cool” is a valid reason

            • tal@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              7 months ago

              In most if not all states, if you have an AAA membership, you can do your DMV stuff at AAA offices and dodge the DMV entirely. The lines are way better.

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                7 months ago

                In my area, the DMV is actually quite pleasant. I’ve had to go like 2-3x ever? And each time was a 15 min adventure:

                • registered my car from out of state
                • bought a car from a local private seller - I brought them with me to finalize the transfer
                • bought a car from an out of state private seller (my brother), just brought the signed title

                Or emissions checks can be submitted at the check station for $8 or filed online for free, so there’s no reason for most people to go to the DMV. In fact, most other stuff can be done online too.

                It honestly takes longer for me to get there (like 15 min drive) than to actually get my business sorted. It’s one of the better run agencies in the state.

                That said, the DOL division sucks. We don’t even require in person renewals, but the two times I had to go sucked (when I first moved here, and for my wife to get her license transferred). It’s a much smaller office with far more people waiting.

                • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️@yiffit.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  7 months ago

                  I have a DMV that’s never busy around me too, at the cost of being further out of my way (even more so now that I’ve moved even farther from it). But it’s worth being able to walk in and go right to a counter (without an appointment even!) instead of waiting 8+ fucking hours starting at 5am like the one in my actual city.

      • tal@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        7 months ago

        flamethrower aren’t considered weapons by the government

        Considered firearms.

        • Dr. Coomer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          7 months ago

          No they’re not. The ATF does not consider flamethrower a firearm and there exists no country wide law about flamethrower, and by law, even a felon can own a fully working flamethrower.

          • tal@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            7 months ago

            Right. I’m saying that you wanted to use the term “firearm”, not “weapon”.

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        California allows roofers to have flamethrowers. They use them for curing something in the roofing tiles(? I don’t know the proper term for those things. They’re basically cardboard covered in tar and gravel, possibly a thin layer of asphalt?).

        It was a bit unnerving the first few times I heard the roofers doing their thing.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          They’re called shingles, asphalt shingles being the most common in most parts of the US because they’re relatively inexpensive.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    7 months ago

    Well now I’m definitely going to have to save up $10,000 for a flame-throwing robot dog.

    How else am I going to protect myself from all the flame-throwing robot dogs?

      • snooggums
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        7 months ago

        Also the reason that flamethrowers aren’t illegal in most states, since being able to project flame makes controlled burns a lot easier.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Don’t even bother shooting them, just use the flamethrower for everything. There may be collateral damage but it’s worth it.

      • adam_y@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I say that, but I, in no way, want that to happen.

        But yeah, Boston Dynamic have long said that they don’t want their robots weaponised, but here we are seeing it happen.

        • tal@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          Boston Dynamics has made multiple robots for DARPA. If they make a really great platform, I expect they’re probably gonna be weaponized at some point. Maybe not by them, but…

          I remember a buddy of mine who was working on an autonomous, self-mapping rover research project at his university on a DARPA project. He was just working on the navigation side, part of a larger project. He was telling me how he had a “huh” moment when they got the first control unit and it had a big red button on it labelled “weapon”.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      7 months ago

      Employees trying to unionize.

      At least it seems like that sort of thing never ends up being a felony…

      • tal@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butane_torch

        Culinary

        Butane torches are frequently employed as kitchen gadgets to caramelize sugar in cooking, such as when making crème brûlée. They may be marketed as kitchen torches, cooking torches, or culinary torches. Use of the butane torch in the kitchen is not limited to caramelizing sugar; it can be used to melt or brown toppings on casseroles or soups, to melt cheese, and to roast or char vegetables such as peppers.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        They are not actually that expensive. You just feel posh when you use one.

        My girlfriend came with one, it’s great for grilled cheese. But I’m not allowed to use it anymore because I set fire to a chocolate bar.

        • tal@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          But I’m not allowed to use it anymore because I set fire to a chocolate bar.

          Huh. TIL.

          https://kitchenroar.com/flammable/chocolate/

          Chocolate, or more so cocoa, is highly flammable. If it catches fire, the blaze is difficult to extinguish since cocoa powder contains 10 to 20 per cent fat and has a huge surface area. Yes, chocolate is flammable. Most solid foods possess at least some level of flammability because they are organic, and chocolate is no exception.

          See, I don’t see how one would have known that without having actually experimented and set a chocolate bar on fire, though.

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        Have you considered a regular dog that doesn’t shoot flames? Our non-flamethrowing dog does a very good job taking care of the rabbits she can’t chase away.

        • tal@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Probably leaves a monolayer of dog shit, though. Now, a flamethrower robo-dog, there’s the dog of the future.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      I hate having to carry around a .5g firelight, this will save me the immense difficulty.

    • NeptuneOrbit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      7 months ago

      Dear ladies and gentleman of the jury. I will now argue that the LLM that programmed the fire breathing dog, did so in such a manner as to make it sentient. The dog was able to and did act of it’s own accord when it killed the woman, Ms Smith. The defendant here did not create sentience in the dog, nor could he have known turning the dog on, outside, may result in the fire breathing dog torch a bystander to death.

      You can see here, the dogs walking and urination patterns closely align with a real, organic dog. This definitively proves that the dog killed the woman, and now the defendant, who only released the dog into nature. Thank you very much.

      • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        That’s a legit point under common law. The owner or keeper of a wild animal is generally strictly liable for damage caused by the animal, except if the animal is local fauna, in which case liability terminates on the animal’s escape back into the wild. I don’t know of any place with native flame throwing robots.

        • WarlordSdocy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          7 months ago

          Theoretically if Amazon drones become wide spread in the environment and I capture one, attach a flamethrower to it, and the above scenario happens after I release it back into the wild, would that defense then apply as Amazon drones are native to the environment?

          • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            That would probably fall under intentional torts rather than strict animal liability. If you do, put up some vague “is this your drone?” flyers with a blurry photo, wait a bit, take the drone to the vet and pay the bill in your name, and build the evidence of your keepership, because you’ll have to admit being a keeper for the defense to work. Also, owners or keepers are liable, and this is one of those rare times in law when or also means and, and Amazon will probably help you defend the case in chief, though they will probably come after you next. This does not constitute legal advice.

        • Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          What if enough flame throwing robot dogs escape into the local environment for them to become an endemic invasive species? Then could we be able to terminate any liability associated with the barbequing of the general public?

  • ɔiƚoxɘup@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    ·
    7 months ago

    “The Mechanical Hound slept but did not sleep, lived but did not live in its gently humming, gently vibrating, softly illuminated kennel back in a dark corner of the firehouse”

    Here we go…

  • Sentient Loom@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 months ago

    I hate this but it’s hilarious. It’s a microcosm of everything that’s making me depressed right now, and somehow that’s precisely why it’s amazing.

    • tal@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      According to the FAQ on the flamethrower, while the unit is apparently pretty flexible in fuel that it can handle, the recommended fuel is mostly diesel. I’d imagine that one could use biodiesel and do climate-friendly heating.

    • Chozo@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      7 months ago

      This is an absolute W for flamethrowing robot dog enthusiasts everywhere.

    • tal@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      I’m waiting for more competition to enter the market and for prices to be driven down further.

      • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        Owning is boring. You want to rent one through my new app. FRaaS. Flamethrower robot as a service. I am starting the first round of venturing funding at 1 billion. It also has block chain in it.

    • Nom Nom@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      They’ll probably ask for a referral, it’s legal in 48 states.

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Ok so… I’m guessing CA and NY are the two that have outlawed flamethrowers for non roofers and non combatants?

        I know damn well the roofers in CA have flame throwers, they’re small-ish, and can only shoot a 7’-8’ flame, but they definitely have them.

        • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          7 months ago

          Only 8’! What monsters are they fighting on those rooftops?

          8" sounds more like a large torch than a flamethrower to me, IDK how they classify things tho.

    • MashedTech@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yeah, no. Saving people sounds like a waste of money. How can we monetize saving them? Their deaths are way more lucrative.

    • coffeebiscuit@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      That was the excuse dog to make this dog possible. Please pay attention when safety robots are announced.

    • Wahots@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      They already have Spot dogs that can do fire supression. But they need the mechanical arm that the newer revisions introduced.