It's been more than a meme.
As the article points out, it's been a question in philosophy since antiquity. At least 2500 years of discussion, probably more. We have no way to know how different people process what they see without peeking inside the brain and comparing. This is newsworthy as it's the closest we've come to verifying it.
There are still open questions about perception and interpretation in addition to just neural pathways, particularly around those with different sensitivities, but that's at least a start.
Color blindness missing one, two, or three sensitivities, tetrachromats or having a fourth sensitivity, shifted sensitivities that peak at slightly different places for different people, all of them lead to ways the colors could be perceived and interpreted differently by different people. It's a good start at research, but there's a lot more that can be answered.
The world we've built is built for our shape -- bipedal, upright. While specialist shapes can be useful in limited circumstances, a bipedal human-shaped robot would be adaptable to the world that already exists.
It doesn't, actually. The official description from the IEC says:
Ingress of water in quantities causing harmful effects shall not be possible when the enclosure is continuously immersed in water under conditions which shall be agreed between manufacturer and user but which are more sever than for numeral 7.
Emphasis mine. The standard test for IPX7 is submersion in still water to a depth of 1 meter for 30 minutes. IPX8 is "better than that". Apple, Google, Samsung, etc. all define how much better on their own. CNBC has an excellent video explainer on what exactly all this means.
These companies are designing to protect against people dropping their phone in the toilet, or maybe a kiddie pool. And yeah, as called out in the CNBC video, the advertising is very deceptive and unfair.
God may be subtle, but he isn't plain mean. -- Albert Einstein