Humanoid Hype Meets Reality: 1X's $20K NEO Home Robot Draws Skepticism, Memes

The humanoid race looked ready to enter the living room this week—until viewers saw what 1X’s $20,000 home robot can actually do.

On Tuesday, the Palo Alto startup unveiled NEO—a sleek household robot it said can fold laundry, stock dishwashers, organize shelves, and learn new chores through AI. But after The Wall Street Journal’s Joanna Stern revealed that the robot’s demo was tele-operated by humans, excitement quickly turned into doubt.

“I think there’s a lot of exaggerated expectations out there, and people are not appreciating that,” UC Berkeley Professor of  Industrial Engineering Ken Goldberg told Decrypt. “There’s a lot of irrational exuberance—the kindest way I could put it—around some of these things. It’s frustrating for us in the research field, because we feel that launching something like this is premature.”

Goldberg questioned whether there was any truly useful application beyond the novelty of someone saying they had a robot in their house, adding that while the idea might be appealing, it was unclear if a real market existed for it.

“So that’s what I worry about," he said, "because if you get a lot of hype, there could be a backlash, and people could really lose confidence in robotics altogether."

The launch positioned NEO as an early glimpse of domestic AI at scale, but critics say it’s another example of marketing hype—and a prototype parading as a finished product.

“This is a preorder for a humanoid home robot that will cost $20,000 or $500/month when it (maybe) ships next year, and currently is not finished,” tech reviewer Marques Brownlee wrote on X. “I see this as more of a hype reel for a thing that they’re hoping to be able to make someday... which is becoming SO common with products these days.”

NEO’s debut also inspired an instant wave of memes. Many joked about the robot’s household role taking an awkward turn, with several viral posts depicting “tele-operated” versions of NEO in bed with users’ spouses, showing the absurdity of paying $20,000 to let a total stranger behind a VR headset wander around your house.

When Stern got an in-person demo, she had the NEO attempt the same chores shown in 1x’s promotional video, with occasionally hilarious results. Fetching a water bottle from a refrigerator 10 feet away took over a minute, while loading a few dishes into a dishwasher took more than five minutes. Stern also noted that the version she tested required frequent breaks to cool down and recharge.

Worse, during the demo, every task was operated remotely by a human pilot wearing a VR headset.

Still, Stern concluded that the robot was significant and called the demonstration meaningful, describing it as “the beginning of physical AI in our lives.”

“Spending the day with NEO was like spending the day with a toddler,” she said, acknowledging that the learning curve for home robots was likely to be steep and long. “The next few years isn't about owning a super-useful robot. It's about raising one [and] letting it learn from your home routines and chores, all at the expense of the privacy of your inner sanctum.”

Not everyone was so forgiving. Those privacy fears were echoed by AI experts and on social media, where users questioned the idea of a networked robot with cameras and remote operators moving freely through private spaces. AI researcher and author Gary Marcus said the issue extends far beyond the home.

“The privacy concerns will be huge,” Marcus told Decrypt. “And the actual amount of productivity gained is likely to be negligible.”

Marcus called the pattern familiar. AI firms have long promised breakthroughs like artificial general intelligence, but instead are finding ways to monetize user data, often by turning personal information into targeted advertising.

“Robot data recorded in the home may just be the next stage in the surveillance capitalism journey,” he said. “Another way to gather intimate data based on overblown promises about what can actually be delivered.”

Attorney Marc Hoag also flagged concerns about 1X’s subscription model, calling its $499-a-month offer “probably too good to be true.” In a detailed breakdown of the company’s terms, Hoag noted that the $200 reservation fee doesn’t lock in a final price or even confirm the payment structure. Buyers won’t learn the actual subscription cost or conditions—such as minimum term length, cancellation policy, or return process—until they receive an official order invitation.

"My wife and I actually really want to order this thing on a subscription basis if only for novelty and to try it out," Hoag wrote. "But not knowing the answers to at least some of those questions above—especially subscription term, cancellation policy, and return procedures—really put a pause in our otherwise spontaneous decision tree."

While many of the reactions online cried foul, some industry voices urged patience.

“For now, it’s all remote operated, and it’s still struggling a little to do basic stuff,” posted AI for Humans podcast co-creator Gavin Purcell. “This isn’t crapping on it—it’s just that this stuff is HARD.”

On Reddit, however, the mood was less forgiving. One commenter called the demo “a cold shower after the promo,” noting that NEO couldn’t perform a single task autonomously.

“It really sounds like their AI isn’t ready, but they think—or hope—it will be by the time they start shipping units,” the user wrote.

Another said early buyers should expect to act as “testers” for 1X’s system, warning that safety remains a bigger obstacle than hype.

“A home robot could turn on your oven, leave water running, fall on a child or a pet, pick up a knife to prepare food, and do something unexpected that results in an injury,” they wrote. “The list of possible safety issues is almost endless.”

Even 1X acknowledges that early customers will need to be comfortable with extensive data collection.

“You have to be okay with this for the product to be useful,” 1X founder and CEO Bernt Børnich told the Wall Street Journal.

The company said it will capture information through NEO’s onboard cameras to improve performance, while blurring people in the robot’s view and respecting user-defined “no-go zones.” Still, that setup won’t reassure everyone.

“In 2026, if you buy this product, it’s because you’re comfortable with that social contract,” Børnich said. “Without your data, we can’t make the product better. I call it the ‘Big Brother, Big Sister’ principle—Big Sister helps you; Big Brother monitors you. We’re very much the Big Sister. The more data you share, the more useful we can be, and you decide where on that scale you want to be.”

1x did not immediately respond to a request for comment by Decrypt.