Going to work with a robot

Evan & Katelyn Heling and Emily Calandrelli discuss a question about moving machinery.
LATERAL is a weekly podcast about interesting questions and even more interesting answers, hosted by Tom Scott. For business enquiries, contestant appearances or question submissions, visit www.lateralcas...
GUESTS:
Evan & Katelyn Heling: ‪@EvanAndKatelyn‬, / evanandkatelyn
Emily Calandrelli: ‪@EmilysScienceLab‬, / thespacegal
HOST: Tom Scott.
QUESTION PRODUCER: David Bodycombe.
RECORDED AT: The Podcast Studios, Dublin.
EDITED BY: Julie Hassett.
GRAPHICS: Chris Hanel at Support Class. Assistant: Dillon Pentz.
MUSIC: Karl-Ola Kjellholm ('Private Detective'/'Agrumes', courtesy of epidemicsound.com).
FORMAT: Pad 26 Limited/Labyrinth Games Ltd.
EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS: David Bodycombe and Tom Scott.
© Pad 26 Limited (www.pad26.com) / Labyrinth Games Ltd. 2023.

[@maty1229]

As someone who is really into WW2 aircraft and does a lot of reading, you see this all the time with crews and their airplane! Whether they're ground crew (maintenance) or air crew. It doesn't need googly eyes, it just needs to be the thing you've been working on/with for a long time, and it also helps if it's the thing that gets you back home in one piece.

[@Atlessa]

I think car or bike people will probably confirm this as well.

[@Galb39]

I thought it would be "operators are worse because they're not fearing for their lives" and not "operators are worse because they're fearing for the robot's life"

[@theadamabrams]

Same. I thought of bomb disposal robots pretty early on in the video, but I did _not_ have the reason correct.

[@macdjord]

My guess was surprisingly close! I guessed that it was 'bomb disposal robots', and using one was 'objectively worse' because, compared to working by hand, you were more likely to accidentally set off the bomb instead of defusing it successfully (with the trick of the question being that, while it's worse by the 'percentage of bombs disarmed' metric, it's better by 'disposal technicians not blow up').

[@jabonought]

happens with roomba(s) too! thats why they offer a service where they repair and return yours rather than just replacing with a new or reconditioned roomba

[@andreaspersson5639]

Thank you, Tom. When I connected the dots, my very first thought was "Humans will Pack Bond with *anything*". Glad someone else did the same.

[@globalincident694]

He's referencing a tumblr post by systlin about roombas apparently

[@deebea6364]

This series deserves so much more love in the algorithm! Liking and commenting to do my part to boost it!

[@lateralcast]

Thanks! We'll get there.

[@katiemiller8313]

Love this series! I especially like these highlight episodes on KZbin. When posted, it's usually the first recommended video of the day. It's a nice 5-10 minute video to start the day! Other perks of video form: *You also get to see the non-verbal communication that is lost in the full podcast. *KZbin let's you know how much time is left in the video, which is a fun predictor of how close the gang is to guessing it correctly.

[@Autoskip]

I was previously aware of this, but I didn't connect the dots fast enough that I would've been sitting out for this question - however, this question did prompt me to come up with a name for my bomb defusal robot that I'll never have - hopefully, calling my first one “Doomed McBoomface III” would help stop any reduction in my ability to send him into dangerous situations.

[@katiemiller8313]

It wouldn't be long before you nicknamed it (him?) 'Doomie'. Doomie goes zoomie! Zoom zoom!

[@markwright3161]

@@katiemiller8313 ...zoom, zoom, ... boom! NOOOOOooooooooo.. Zoomie, Doomie go boomie, I'm gloomie :)

[@Oxirador]

Having Evan & Katelyn on the show is such a good idea! :)

[@nulious]

they were on the Imp And Skizz Podcast a few months ago

[@m4rcyonstation93]

i honestly had no clue what their last name was before this LMAO

[@hendricklamar5061]

Same 😂 been seeing their vids for 4 years now ​@@m4rcyonstation93

[@the8bitgentleman]

7:13 I remember a very popular post by systlin on tumblr in Jan '18 that used that phrase as a reaction to a story of a roomba that got scared during a thunderstorm. Unrelated to the tumblr legend of stabby, the fictional roomba of a spaceship that had a knife attached to it, as written by sepulchritude.

[@economicurtis]

This suggests we need a reboot of the Short Circuit movie franchise.

[@delta250a]

Never reboot perfection.

[@Atlessa]

A remaster (in the literal sense) maybe, but certainly not a reboot. The copies I have are at best VHS quality. :/

[@IvoTrausch]

Could we keep our hopes up for a TechDif special someday?

[@fogstarmoss]

That would be fantastic

[@abigailcooling6604]

Christmas special?

[@robertwilloughby8050]

I have a funny feeling it's already been recorded.

[@ids1024]

Gary is immediately eliminated despite the fact that's not how this show works.

[@iamjamieq]

Lateral with Tech Dif

[@RobBulmahn]

I'm actually kinda surprised it took that long for someone to think of bomb disposal robots. That was the first thing to pop into my head.

[@korganrocks3995]

Me too, bombs/mines were the first thing I thought of. Surprised Tom hasn't made a video on the topic tbh!

[@KefazX]

Same

[@panda4247]

@@korganrocks3995 video like: "I am standing here in and there is a bomb inside that building. I've always wanted to know how accurate the movie depictions of the bomb defusals were, but for obvious reasons I could not just go and defuse one by myself. But this (camera zooms out and pans to another man) is Mark, and he can show it to us" ".... I've been defusing bombs for 7 years, and nowadays we don't do it ourselves, we have our robots to go there physically. This (points to the robot) is Edward, he has 3 cameras - one for the widescreen picture for movement, and one camera mounted on each hand and I'll be using this remote control and we can see everything on this display..." "Why did you name the robot Edward?" "Well, there is this movie with Johnny Depp..." (Tom chuckles) "oh my god, Edward Scissorhands. That's brilliant and dark at the same time." ...

[@brontewcat]

Yes- me too. I didn’t think of bomb disposal specifically. I started with the thought of something like mining.

[@catmage]

IDK about Tom, but I heard that phrase in Community. Jeff tells the study group something along the lines of "Humans pack-bond with anything, which is why I can take this pencil, say his name is Steve, and do this" Then he snaps the pencil in half and the group gasps

[@KrisNoble]

So happy to see Emily on here! Absolutely brilliant lineup for this one 🙌🏻

[@nocturnalizzie]

I was so excited when I learned Evan and Katelyn were on this episode! Their channel is such wholesome chaos and I absolutely adore them! :D

[@57thorns]

5:20 You can say the panellists have to tread their way through a mine field.

[@macdjord]

My guess was surprisingly close! I guessed that it was 'bomb disposal robots', and using one was 'objectively worse' because, compared to working by hand, you were more likely to accidentally set off the bomb instead of defusing it successfully (with the trick of the question being that, while it's worse by the 'percentage of bombs disarmed' metric, it's better by 'disposal technicians not blow up').

[@Tarnuris]

I assumed it was comparing using the robot after time compared to when they first started using the robot. Not compared to using humans

[@1bluecat962]

I did not expect to see Evan and Katelyn here, what a delight!

[@korganrocks3995]

I only know them from watching their playthrough of Valheim, and going by their hilarious incompetence at that game I never expected to see them on something like this! 😄

[@sorrynotsorry8224]

@@korganrocks3995 They're better known for being DIY KZbinrs (though yes, they do have a gaming channel and stuff as well).

[@MarylandFarmer.]

Great to see Emily on here!

[@its_clean]

I always use Fritz Haber as the platonic ideal example of unintended consequences in science/tech, but this is way better. A lot more tangible and relatable for people to understand. "Bomb techs get so attached to their robots that they don't want to risk them doing dangerous things, when the whole purpose of an EOD robot is to do dangerous things to keep humans safe from risk."

[@zacm.2342]

7:19 It's "humans will pack bond with anything", Tom (at least that's the only variation I was previously aware of) And yes, we absolutely will. Was actually about to comment "humans will pack bond with anything exhibit #289586" just as you brought it up!

[@space.tel-e-grams]

It's the curse of having compassion.

[@DiMono]

I emotionally bonded with a boxelder bug once. When it died I was sad for three days.

[@davranbekrozmetov9425]

I came to this channel because I miss Tom. And I thought it would be not so interesting. But it’s actually really really good. Another thing is, every time someone asks a question I worry it will be some stupid answer and waste my time but every single time the question and the answer are really good. Especially this one. She did not lie when she said the answer is wholesome. My god it is

[@phileo_ss]

Didn't expect to see Evan and Katelyn on this channel! Interesting content as always.

[@robertk1701]

Evan & Katelyn popping up somewhere else. Just recently saw them (well their PC at least) on Linux Tech Tips on an episode rating PC "glow ups" from Twitter.

[@MeriaDuck]

My first thoughts were going down that dark route too. When listening to the full podcast I guessed this would be on KZbin 😂

[@MyRegardsToTheDodo]

I thought drone operators too. Mainly because that's probably also true. The more a soldier gets to know their enemy on a personal level, the less they're willing to shoot at one another. That's why during WWI units were rotated after x months, because they got to know the enemy in the other trenches (and that's also one of the reasons why the unauthorized Christmas Truce of 1914 was possible).

[@Elwaves2925]

I went straight to bomb disposal but never would have got to emotional attachment.

[@nikkiofthevalley]

I got this one instantly. I've heard of those, and I remember an anecdote about someone testing mine "defusal" robots and not liking it because it looked like it was struggling after it exploded a few times.

[@fogstarmoss]

I almost got it. My first instinct was: "the robot is too cute!" And then I thought about how Spot the dog from Boston dynamics might be used by the army (someday/already?) and I got sad.

[@kevdragmas]

Destin from SED recently did a video on designing video games, and he interviewed an Oregon Trail dev who said that just by allowing players to name their characters made the players try harder at not letting their characters die xD

[@Zack_Wester]

I remember reading a story about some army base engineer(logic, motor pool team) the one that you at the base would go to to get the car, truck, tank, some if not most arms anything from a tank cannon to a 6 shot revolver and so on) the story is that one day a big guy (almost body builder) Think someone that have Arnold Schwarzenegger as a role mode comes in in crying carrying the damadge Bomb defusal robot like a adult would carry there sick child to a hospital acting like the engineer there was doctors at a hospital begging them to save the robot. story two a Bomb defusal robot ended up MIA one day at a base later it was found out that the Bomb Defusal team had gotten a day of Leave granted and they had say we will go out fishing at this pound/lake or what ever somewhat near the base, they took the Bomb Defusal robot whit them and gave it a fishing rod to fish whit.

[@jacktattersall9457]

Did the bomb disposal robot catch any fish?

[@Zack_Wester]

@@jacktattersall9457 sadly not mentioned in the story.

[@SylviaRustyFae]

​@@Zack_Wester Did they mention how many beers the bomb disposal robot drank whilst fishin?

[@aixtom979]

Basically my first thought on reading the question was "bomb disposal". But the angle I thought about was that they become "less effective" in an "objective way", because it takes longer to set up the robot and do it with a robot than doing it in person. So the job itself becomes less effective, just much, much safer for the operator.

[@macdjord]

My guess was similar! I guessed that it was 'objectively worse' because, compared to working by hand, you were more likely to accidentally set off the bomb instead of defusing it successfully (with the trick of the question being that, while it's worse by the 'percentage of bombs disarmed' metric, it's better by 'disposal technicians not blow up').

[@MikeRees]

Nailed this one. Objective was definitely the key here, but not in terms of goals but as opposed to subjective.

[@Artess-od8wb]

Interesting, I thought about bomb disposal pretty early on, but I thought it would be the opposite: the operators get more careless because there is less risk involved.

[@DrZaius3141]

Wasn't there a Tom Scott video a while back that had a maintenance robot in some Swiss (?) facility that looked like a dog? I really wouldn't want to send my little robot doggy in a dangerous spot...

[@kantpredict]

I haven't seen the video, but that's probably a Boston Dynamics Spot robot

[@walkingpizza1796]

yesss Evan and Katelyn :) :)

[@davio3d]

To be fair, you dont need eyes to connect to something. Just say it have personality and treat it as a person. I bring you evidence; companion cube from Portal

[@Elwaves2925]

Many people name or form attachments to their vehicle as well.

[@christafranken9170]

My robot vacuum, De Sjaak, doesn't have eyes either. I definitely feel that we've connected through

[@route2070]

Pilots and their planes, or a lit of people and their cars.

[@groovemoustache]

Yeah I'd argue that, although not exactly the same phenomena, from an evolutionary point-of-view it probably shares a lot psychologically with the phenomena of experiencing tools as an extension of the body, where the tip of a knife or even excavator arm can start feeling just as sensible as the tip of our fingers. The human's mind ability to extend itself beyond itself is truly amazing. Whether it's engineers and robots, pilots and their vehicles, samurai and swords, construction workers and cranes, amputees and prosthetics, etc

[@ZipplyZane]

I find that the companion cube was so over hyped that it didn't work on me. I just kept waiting for this intense feeling that never came. Because GladOS was telling me to form an attachment, I intrinsically wanted to do the opposite.

[@tripnick555]

First time I've seen Evan and Katelyn not making something either amazing or crazy, or both!

[@ninodoko3437]

Ok, so my favorite story on this topic is from VSauce's video called "Your Brain on Tech" (from Mind Field S2E4). Starting at 14:50, he shows people some robot bugs and asks people to break them with a hammer, and most of the time they do; They're just small toys. But after literally just giving the bugs names, letting them move around and prescribing personalities, people really didn't like breaking them, or outright refused to break them. "You want me to kill Joe?" - "Please smash Joe." "... Joe I'm sorry!" Humans WILL pair-bond with anything.

[@grandetaco4416]

I deduced this midway through, because I remember seeing a story about 5 or 6 years ago about military guys coming back really sad and wanting someone to help repair the robot as if it were their dog. It was kind of mentioned off the cuff in the story. I found this quite odd behavior when I saw this report. I didn't realize this was a universal problem until this video.

[@kayteefowler1585]

Seen this question twice now and came back for that moment of "humans will pair bond with anything", too hilarious. Left me wondering what I've paired bonded to. Although I felt empathy for the bomb disposal person. In fact, maybe that would be a good way to measure empathy in a human. 😍

[@Aviertje]

I guessed about 60% of this from the get-go, which is the kind of job.. but my logic was that the robot made them either careless, or that the fine skills involved in being there in the fleshy danger place simply ended up as becoming less relevant over time. Who needs a handsaw and related skills when they have bandsaw or other electrified alternative? The actual answer was a nice surprise though!

[@LeopardMask12]

First one of these highlights where I guessed it IMMEDIATELY and was waiting with bated breath to confirm my guess! I was very slightly off, but basically the same idea - I remembered a story about designs for robots that could clear minefields, and one was like a centipede that stepped on every mine in its path and slowly blew up more and more of itself as it crawled across. When it was not even all the way across, but had started getting mangled and broken and was "struggling", the test was called off for being "inhumane". Despite the only thing being harmed being, y'know. a robot.

[@elchivi90]

My mind went right through the Da Vinci Robot and was almost convinced until she said "warfare".

[@bobapplebob9695]

My first thought was to do with emotional attachment to robots doing a dangerous job (the word "objectively" being the clue there), but I was thoroughly in the realm of repairs, not bomb defusal.

[@erictaylor5462]

This brings up an intersecting issue. When you get an airplane it comes with an ID plate. That plate identifies that airplane and if the records still exist, the plate tells you what records go with it. Even if the airplane is completely destroyed so long as you have the plate you can rebuild the airplane from completely new parts. Legally it's still the same airplane. If you're willing to spend enough money, you can repair any robot no matter how badly it is damaged.

[@KusaneHexaku]

the plane of theseus?

[@TallinuTV]

The “humans will pair bond with anything” reference that I’m aware of comes from Reddit stories. Whether there’s another jump to whatever Tom is thinking of or not, I cant say.

[@russbowlus]

I read it as "humans will pack bond with anything," but yeah--reddit/tumblr writing prompts about humans in space is where I saw it.

[@yessirge]

4:03 LOL I love Tom Scott

[@BodyMusicification]

I remember hearing about this study too, so bomb diffusal came to mind fairly early

[@philgray8811]

Check out the TV show Bluestone '42 - this effect is depicted brilliantly

[@joelf1]

My initial thought after just having heard the question is defusing explosive devises. There are robots that can do this nowadays and potentially the same people who would defuse the devices themselves usually are also the ones controlling the robots? So the more they use the robots, the more they lose hands-on experience, so to speak? But are they "objectively" getting worse at it? I'm not sure.

[@joelf1]

Nice, I actually got it right, was only missing the point about the emotional connection. Though in the back of my head somewhere that sounds familiar, perhaps I read about it at some point as well.

[@SeraSer4phic]

I call everything I own (almost) my sons and daughters. Not necessarily giving them names but I take care of my children.

[@RandomOnlineIdiot]

I had no prior knowledge on this one but my immediate thought (the what and the why) was spot on. I then had to wait whilst Tom went off on cricket to find out if I was right. Makes it simultaneously highly entertaining and infuriating. :-D

[@cedarbobedar7223]

What?! Evan and Katelyn??? No way I love them!!! Nice job Tom et al!

[@staffsgtsarge]

When I first listened to this question my first guess was this was the New Zealand angry robot they made to train phone centre workers.

[@AngelWedge]

I thought it's nice to see two people on one feed… and then realised that with the background behind them, there's no way we can tell if they're actually in the same room or not. And that makes me think it would be really easy to make a simple virtual studio now. Most video chat apps allow you to replace your background with something… so if everybody used a quarter of the same image, there'd be almost no extra work in post production to put the feeds next to each other so they line up

[@SylviaRustyFae]

Assumin ofc that everyone can easily be keyed out from whatevs their variable backgrounds are...

[@AngelWedge]

@@SylviaRustyFae I remember when getting something like that working was a real challenge… now, it seems like almost everybody on Zoom can do it just by clicking a button. I've not done it myself, but I think we might have reached a point where sufficiently advanced technology turns into magic.

[@SylviaRustyFae]

@@AngelWedge Its still smth where it will depend on things like camera quality and lightin condtns and more The fact that i cannot be in a well lit room when lookin at a comp screen without it causin me sensory discomfort from my light sensitivity means that no matter what, if im on a webcam theres gonna be a lot of garbled mess if it tries to just autokey out my background, as theres just not enuf light for it to go off of so many parts will look like theyre all the same darkness even if my arm is there And ive seen folks on this show with web cameras that are givin such bad footage i think they got them in the 00s, and that too is even harder to autokey out

[@brontewcat]

Honestly - the first thing I thought of was the operator was sending the robot into a dangerous situation, and they became attached to the robot. So they were looking at the robot subjectively not objectively.

[@Alex_dlc]

My first guess was surgeons using those Da Vinci surgical robotic arms.

[@se7endeadly418]

Tom, this is absolutely fascinating and adorable. If you read this, is there a way we can officially dub this "The R2D2 Paradox"? Machine designed for a specific purpose, user grows too fond of it to want to use it for its purpose.

[@economicprisoner]

My guess before question is finished: Various flight and landing automations used in aircraft.

[@GameProductionMatt]

The phrase Tom recalls is from the TV show Community, from a brilliant monologue of the character Jeff Winger that involves a pencil named Steve and Ben Affleck winning an Oscar!

[@GameProductionMatt]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/q3LahImFobSafposi=WrFBdFujYOn3XtjZ

[@danlw212]

About 5 seconds before it hit Evan I was thinking mine sweeping robots. I never thought it was because of an emotional connection though.

[@sandwich2473]

I knew this one immediately despite not having any prior knowledge of the thing at all It's very understandable

[@panda4247]

3:30 Tom was joking about MIT having a robot sweeping applications into one bin or another... But that is actually a valid train of though in the context of the question. I think Amazon [citation needed] had tried some kind of AI a few years ago to sift through the applications... The problem was, that since a high percentage of previous hired people (training data?) were men , it started automatically discarding women. So that would fall under the problem with objectivity. They got into some problems with this and discarded that AI (

[@erictaylor5462]

I did a school report once on Joseph Stalin The day after I turned the report in I was playing Trivial Pursuit. We were playing with the rule that the other players could look at the card and choose which of the questions would be asked. They could not look at the answers. None of the other players knew about my report, nor did they know that there were two countries that had a State called Georgia (This was before the fall of the USSR) so when they saw this question all were sure that I would not know the answer. So when they asked, "What Soviet leader was born in Georgia?" they were all shocked when I said "Joseph Stalin" without any hesitation to think about. "Soviet Georgia" is now the Republic of Georgia. and it's a great way to mess with Americans. Ask, "If you are on the West Coast of Georgia, looking out to sea, what body of water are you looking at. The Black Sea is the correct answer.

[@SteinGauslaaStrindhaug]

5:40 Mine field clearing?

[@TheGreatSteve]

I thought it was remote surgery, which made sense to me almost right up till the end.

[@IceMetalPunk]

Engineers: "So we made this robot to defuse bombs, so that if anything goes wrong, only the robot gets damaged, not a person." Soldiers: "I will protect Cassie with my life." Engineers: "No, that's the opposite of what we ma--did you say 'Cassie'?"

[@psilorder86]

Guess at 0:22 : Bomb disposal. They were getting attached to the robot and worried about getting it hurt.

[@TheVoidSinger]

lol knew it from the moment the question was asked.... I've known EOD people and attachment issues are a real thing

[@boy638]

The answer was one heck of a bombshell

[@version365]

3:02 So, it's remote operated.. my immediate guess is Bomb Disposal robots. edit: yep.. got it. hehe.. although I had no idea about the human connection study. interesting!

[@epiendless1128]

I got bomb disposal at 3 minutes, but thought the operators would be _more_ reckless.

[@Jackamo6200]

Hey Evan and Katelyn, didn’t expect to see you guys here! ❤

[@MaidenOfAir]

I haven’t watched any of the video yet, I’ve just heard the question. Is it the mars rover? Getting emotionally attached?

[@bonelesswatermelon420]

Tom I think the phrase here is "humans will pack bond with anything."

[@mocod_2402]

People will form an attachment to their roomba. So I'm not surprised.

[@gaweyn]

2:53 good question, maybe an explosive disposal robot? 3:40 then not :D 6:33 solution.... ohhhhhhh

[@denniswood6791]

We have all bonded with R2D2 and C3PO.

[@CheyenneRose]

I nearly got 100% of it, but the story I'd heard was something about how the robots were built to be destroyed (not sure what field of research it was supposed to be in!) and the researchers grew so attached to them that intentionally destroying them caused a lot of strain. I also wonder when that level of attachment kicks in. Anyone else have to do that exercise in school where they get a fake baby to take care of? The results rarely went well for the kids I went to school with.... 🙄

[@basementdwellercosplay]

Kind of love that Katelyn got this story cause Evan and her will put eyes and give names to a lot of things they make (e.g. the pumpkins and pressure pots)

[@hens0w]

Bluestone 42 is an excellent comedy with this as a subplot

[@ieyke]

Defusal Adjacent With Evan & Katelyn!

[@thecallousone]

"humans will pack bond with anything" you read that on tumblr my dude

[@sophiamarchildon3998]

Initial thoughts: a cold-hard job (military) that got compromised by touchy-feely robot reminding them of their humanity. Or rather quite the opposite!: mils having free, unchecked, use of heartless, foreboding, drones to "get rid of bad". In this context, they carry their job alright. But objectively? No way. Soldiers should be moral and ethical first.

[@sophiamarchildon3998]

1:51 Predator, nameless soldier, ... who would know any different?

[@sophiamarchildon3998]

Results: more wholesome than my cynic ways.

[@ArifRWinandar]

My first thought was "does this robot have a face?"

[@audreyprewett8076]

today on "humans will pack-bond with literally anything"...

[@10thdoctor15]

That's the whole point of using a robot remotely.

[@kevinbarnard3502]

The operator's worry about the robot being destroyed for emotional reasons. The operator's higher-ups also worry about the robots being destroyed; for financial reasons. Those robots are expensive.

[@Imurai]

Companion Cube!

[@Yupppi]

I find it slightly concerning to give a bomb disposal robot that's about to explode your girlfriend's name. What Tom said about humans feeling connected with a thing rings very true. I regularly wonder how come you can attach eyes to anything and women I know will adore it, especially if it's nothing like a real living animal. And how cartoon characters have become more and more just blobs with eyes when I remember in my chidlhood the characters being persons or animals or something in between.

[@iamagi]

It achieved its purpose, be happy for it. But yes, psychology is cool.

[@fumthings]

either that or terminator 2...

[@demothes]

Hey Tom and team, these clips are great, but the first visible comment has been giving too many hints! Please pin a non-spoiler so that other speculation is hidden until we look for it. Thanks!

[@lateralcast]

Unfortunately, the comments preview doesn't always put the pinned comment first. Not sure what the solution to this is.

[@ZdzichuWiertara96]

I just got an idea. Lateral with TechDiff crew.

[@PsyKeks]

Inhad JUST heard this a week or so ago. 🤔 But I can't quite remember where it was… Anyone here with the same subscriptions as me who can remind me? 😆

[@AJBlue98]

Does anybody else think Evan sounds exactly like Penn Jillette?

[@LeonardoDaFinchy]

Ok, but, hear me out - as per another recent episode, let the bomb disposal peeps wear a costume

[@krishnaghatol1694]

Qqa to all the Kevins in the chat!!!

[@bertilhatt]

Wilsoooon!

[@CrispyChestnuts]

Call of Duty: Wholesome Warfare