There is a school of thought in robotics/AI that believe embodiment is necessary (or at least the fastest way) for us to learn abstract thought. Embodiment can really span the gamut of meanings, but there are definitely researchers that believe humanoid robots are the best path forward to that goal.

If you have a more specific goal in mind, e.g. solving a small set of industrial/commercial use cases, that changes the calculus dramatically.

Perhaps because that form factor has heavily informed civilization's current challenges?

It really sounds like the author's long term goal is AGI. I believe he said something about how being at a company with a 5 year head start on human shaped robots would give him the data advantage he believes is needed for AGI.

Why do you think it is an accident? I thought evolution is an adaptation mechanism. If anything I'd say we've got a pretty cool form factor (peak human form, not like me who is out of shape lmao).

The human body has been optimized for a very complex objective function, and in a very different environment to a robot. If you specify what the robots are doing, and the set of constraints like power source, size, weights, etc., the optimal design will unlikely be humanoid.

I used the word accident to emphasize that there is no design or designer. I agree that evolution is adaptive and often creates optimal solutions.

Human shaped robot is not a technical solution, it is a feature