I'm thinking the humanoid approach to robotics is now a gimmick. In most--if not all--cases, a robot in human form is not necessary at all if the approach is to get work done.
That's kinda a weird conclusion to reach. They discontinued this (old, hydraulic) humanoid robot to focus on their new (fully electric) humanoid robot.
If a robot were to pilot a analog aircraft, it would need to be roughly human shape or specifically designed.
If a robot were to reach an AED without frying it with magnets, it would need to be tall enough and have fingers.
I agree with you that there are more efficient shapes out there (like the robot from interstellar) but a humanoid at slightly shorter than the average adult (for fear related reasons) shape is the best general purpose shape because it is so backward compatible in all sorts of not yet imagined emergency scenarios.
The golden ratio is found throughout nature and specifically the proportions of limbs to each other. The golden ratio is an observation that the fibbonacchi series occurs in nature and that the next step is 1.618. For a generalist robot, applying these kinds of "natural efficiencies" make sense, but constraining to the human shape is probably just to get investors to empathize enough for funding.
