I was 100% with you until suddenly this technical claim pops out. You might feel this way, and might be right, but why? Changing a diaper is crazy hard, I absolutely agree, but you seem to be just declaring from vibes that we 'require an entirely different kind of robotics'. Can you put your finger on why this is true?
Not nitpicking for the fun of it - I'm genuinely interested. Robot person.
After that, they are limited in their understanding of physics. After that, perhaps understanding of physics and physiology would come into play - but perhaps superhuman perception and reaction time could reduce the need for intuitive understanding physics and physiology.
in case anyone was wondering why I proffered "physics" in two different sentences.
But can this be done with baby skin and lung safe chemicals at a reasonable temperature?
Point being humanoid designs for robots that manipulate objects designed for humans are an artificially hard problem we have decided to fail at solving.
Meanwhile it must also be strong enough to move and restrain a range of infants which is a level of force capable of harm without any possibility to fail deadly.
You might always get hit by a freak accident. Or an unlucky combination of cosmic rays replaces all your software (including all the redundant and fail safe systems) all at once.
This is all extremely unlikely, but not literally 0.
Note: I specifically mention an unlucky combination of cosmic rays. You can protect against a single or even a handful of cosmic rays just fine.
For this device you agree with mine and the original posters position.
A Diaper however can be designed not to risk grievous bodily harm for an infant when used correctly by a human. If someone doesn’t change their kids dipper that’s neglect by the parents not a negative news story for the manufacturers. We’re a long way from this point when it comes to robots.