Slashdot Mirror
The Future of Love and Sex - Robots
nem75 writes "The New York Times has a review of British AI researcher David Levy's book 'Love and Sex with Robots'. He claims that within a span of about 50 years the day will come when people could actually fall in love with life-like robots. While this may seem far fetched at first, he has some pretty interesting views. 'He begins with what scientists know about why humans fall in love with other humans. There are 10 factors, he writes, including mystery, reciprocal liking, and readiness to enter a relationship. Why can't these factors apply to robots, too?' The case he builds goes much further though, and certainly provides food for thought." Update: 12/14 16:16 GMT by Z : This article is very similar to a discussion we had recently.
I'd rather have my Companion Cube!
=Smidge=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uu0TXl15PgU
I count 2, and they're on the front of the chestal area.
of why humans fall in love with humans.
Because they are not robots.
"I only speak the truth"
Karma: null(Mostly affected by an unassigned variable)
Can't wait to get my own Lucy Liu bot!
Sounds pretty meaningless and shalow to me. Sex is a _lot_ more than just 'getting off'.
A more interesting and likely scenario is tech improvements to sex toys. Imagine what something like Real Doll will be in 10 or 15 years time, and it's not much of a stretch to say you could have a sizeable portion of the population abandoning the dating scene. We already see that in small numbers due to webcams, and it seems reasonable to extrapolate the trend accelerating with accelerated improvements to the tech.
I think I read this in an article by Lester del Rey published in Astounding back in 1938!
Rod Serling covered this in "The Lonely": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lonely_(The_Twilight_Zone)
"We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
"Silver Metal Lover" by Tanith Lee
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
Who hasn't had a crush on a fictional character? As you are largely geeks reading this, I submit that many of you find at least some Anime girls hot - even though you know full well that they are not real: the human heart can vast in its ability to accept.
I had a huge crush on Ryoko from the Tenchi Muyo animes. This crush didn't even require the physical contact that would be present with a robotic hottie. There is little room for doubt that our emotionally sticky limbic system can latch onto unusual objects of affection - I believe it's not unusual to be loved by anyone...or to love anything.
Read my Very Short "Stories"
I can't believe some people would be so shallow as to only love robots who conform to a pre-conceived idea of beauty. Some of us have always loved ours regardless of appearances. Even if they were the old-fashioned "square-headed" variety.
Insensitive clods!
People already fall in love with a car, a boat, a Playstation, a video game character, a crack addicted ex... We can love anything. No news here.
I love lamp!
The Silver Metal Lover
The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination
- Douglas Adams
Well, not on purpose at least, right?
Read my Very Short "Stories"
Hey Baby, Wanna kill all humans?
Thats fine until the robots figure out how to reproduce.
Anyone remember "Deamon Seed" or the more recent Battle Star Galatica.
Can you rape a robot?
Can a robot rape you?
I'd much rather have a holodeck, the possibilities are endless!
(That and I already have the sign made to hang over the door that reads:
Scott's Holodeck of Whores: Enter At Own Risque)
Right!
ilovegeorgebush
Well, there are people that are having sex with inanimate dolls (real dolls plug here), It would not be far fetched that someone would be amenable to the idea and even build a business out of having sex with robots. There are more advantages than using the regular purveyors. It's more sanitary, there are more control on the looks of the service provider and you only have to perform maintenance every so often.
I think that "love" is too much of a word for it. Infatuated or having "a crush" would be more appropriate. It's going to be something carnal and not with meaning. It would take a long time for us humans to develop enough intelligence in robots for us to have a "meaningful relationship" with them.
Vi havas e-poston.
This just in a member of Slashdot has finally had sex. Stay tuned for news at 10.
I smoked pot once. But I DID NOT inhale. Will you hire me?
This former ./ article deals with jurisdiction to legalize marriages with robots.
>> when people could actually fall in love with life-like robots
It doesn't even require a life-like robot for a nerd to fall in love with.. Usually a bit of pixels on the screen, resembling some attractive women having sex with men do just fine $)
- Arwen, I'm your father, Agent Smith.
- Well, you're just Smith, but my father is Aerosmith!
ilovegeorgebush
You're saying that people keep pets because the people are overweight or short? Not only does correlation not imply causation, but I don't even think there's a correlation here. Prove me wrong.
well, that's got to be the stupidest question I've ever read. OF COURSE WE DO.
In Soviet Russia jokes are formulaic and decidedly non-humorous.
Only on slashdot would someone consider having sex with a robot as a relationship.
America, Home of the Brave.
Damn those Replicants!!!
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
I can only assume that anyone who imagines being "in love" with a machine is severely emotionally stunted. What is love without the need, and willingness to sacrifice? What is love without emotional exposure? What is love without the risk of loss?
It is totally okay with me if this guy wants to fuck animatronics, but he doesn't do himself a service by confusing that with love.
-Peter
Just a random thought here but thinking along the lines of the Futurama reasoning for "Don't date Robots!!!" and mixing in Idiocracy evolution logic two wrongs might make a right. If you give all the stupid people robots to have sex with they can't make more stupid people. Hell for the real stupid people we can just recycle the robots.
This is what happens when propellerheads get paid to write books about love and sex. There's a lot more to love than what is tangible and quantifiable.
A robot must never harm a human, unless "kinky mode" is enabled.
Blank until
It was Earth.
Don't date robots!
Well, that's a twist!
"Advice to all future male scientists: be sure you understand the opposite sex, especially if you intend being a computer expert. Otherwise, you may find yourself, like poor Elwood, defeated by a jealous machine, a most dangerous sort of female, whose victims are forever banished--to...
the Twilight Zone."
http://www.tv.com/the-twilight-zone/from-agnes---with-love/episode/12725/summary.html
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
It is easy to love someone or something.
It is harder to feel loved.
And harder still to feel loved by something you know does not think or feel.
For that reason, humans will continue to feel loved (or not loved) by other humans more easily than they can connect with inanimate objects.
People often overlook things they care about when there is no risk they won't get it. Look at the dating sites. People make a list of what they like, then they date people who match. Then they realize what they should have listed.
Then again, in an overpopulated society, I definitely would not want to encourage more people to be breeders, and I see lot of good in this notion, even if I think it won't solve all the problems people have. Overcoming people's basic animal and getting more in control of explosive population growth may be a prerequisite for a robot-based society, which simply doesn't function well with large numbers of people. And having people voluntarily fail to breed is the least invasive way of reducing population numbers.
The worst case, of course, would be that each of these robot-human pairs would feel a need to have a human child, which would actually make the situation worse. But I doubt that will happen.
Btw, for an excellent and entertaining treatment of this robot love issue, see the underrated B-movie Cherry 2000.
Kent M Pitman
Philosopher, Technologist, Writer
That's the idea behind the movie Cherry 2000.
our Cylon Overlords version 1.0
Men won't date overweight women
Might be different some other place, e.g. More than 90% of Tongans are overweight, making the South Sea islanders the world's fattest nation.
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
...the day that I first see a robot with a hard-on. It's always a bit awkward saying you're not gay to man or beast or robot or whatever. Not that I know about the last two.
Once you start despising the jerks, you become one.
Hence the large number of pets people have.
But loving of pets is illegal in most places, no matter what you see on those websites.
Toss a Teddy Ruxpin speaker into a Real-Doll and I'm good to go!
"...Oh I forgot to warn you. His Arse is a pencil sharpner!"
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Terrorists can't threaten a country's freedom and democracy. Only lawmakers and voters can do that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNVyIwuywzE
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Where are the comments about how it's already happening? Who among us *hasn't* sleep with a computer in their bed that they loved? One time my friends piled all my programming books on top of me when I passed out. What happened? I slept great and woke up with the feeling a loving aura next to me. Yes, C++ and I love each other and care deeply for each other. Same goes for my computers. I love them. I haven't really *made* love to them since I can't afford to buy a Sex Drive(TM), but these are issues we're working through...
-Tim
ps. I guess I'm a polygamist because of how my love is spread...
I wonder what various religions would have to say about this. We already know that the Space Pope does not approve.
No one cares what your captcha was
Houston TX, USA
Seriously, I'm not going to have sex with a robot. Get over it!
Uh, yeah, slashdot and all these articles and books and research are all aimed at YOU specifically. Thanks for telling us you're not interested, now everybody focusing on this can give it up and go do something else. Right, come on, get real - whether you will use them or not, it's pretty obvious that sex robots are going to be huge someday, millions of people will be using them, and robot technologies probably won't be going backward as time progresses. People already use realdoll and various other toys, and I'm sure that sex robots will be a lot more fun than Mr Right Hand at least for casual entertainment (which itself will become increasingly important as technology replaces humans in almost every role in the economy, freeing us from having to work so much).
I suppose if robots can be programmed to fall in love with humans, they'd also fall in love with one another? Whatever that means.
I guess letting yourself fall for a robot might be a bit like letting yourself fall for an emotionally unavailable human; people do it all the time, but there is surely some level of dysfunction involved in doing so.
In a word: Presence
I don't want my wang anywhere near a power source strong enough to power a robot.
-mcgrew
Tis the season to commit suicide is not a funny one.
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
No, I said that people keep pets because they can't find someone to love them. Do some ven diagrams. Lonely people is the big circle. The short men and overweight women are circles that interesect with the big lonely one, but neither is completely contained - their are short men/overweight women that have found companions. Add a 4th circle that again is not completely contained by any of the other 3. This is the circle of pet owners and it contains a large section (more than 1/2) of the lonely people.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
But Venn diagrams supported by supposition and not hard data are more than useless, because you wasted your time to draw such a thing.
"Little is much when little you need."
I'm personally repulsed by the idea of carrying on with a advanced real doll but to each their own.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
In fifty years robots will morph their shapes to match desires of the moment, exude pheromones tailored to the individual human, and use psychology to be the perfect companion. The question isn't whether humans will learn love their robot better halves (that's nearly guaranteed), but will artificial insemination become the primary method of reproduction. Future births may consist of men copulating with robots that cryostore the semen for later use, then, as dictated by the Junior Anti-Sex League, said sperm will be combined with carefully selected ova in artificial wombs for the perfect test-tube baby. It'll be a vast improvement over the Orgasmatron, because you'll never need to leave home.
"I improvise. It's my greatest talent. I prefer situations to plans..." --Wintermute, William Gibson's "Neuromancer"
...it's probably true. I mean, how many girl-trekkies do you know who are infatuted with Data from TNG?
In an effort to conform with internet communication standards, please note that the above comment is 100% biased opinion
I'll have sex with clones, cyborgs, Replicants and androids. Individually or in groups.
But NO ROBOTS!
Half to draw the line somewhere...
I think we can take this a little further,
When does a human stop being a human and does it become a robot? Or a subform of one of the two?
Already we can artificially replicate large parts of the human body.
I can easily imagine that in 50 to 100 years from now we can replace any part of the body for a custom machine made part whenever needed or wanted.
New heart? check, New legs? check, does your stomach hurt? here, have another.
We might run into a bit of trouble with the brain but I dare to bet we can come pretty close to a artificial human brain in that time-span.
In that light I can imagine you could take a real human being and alter or rebuild that human completely with man-made materials.
Is it still a human in that case? or a Cyborg, or a Robot?
If you used to love that human, could you still love it when it's the same human but in a artificial form?
Life starts at the end of your comfort zone.
I just want to say that I'd kill everyone in this thread to give you a mod point :-)
Bill Clinton: Pimp we can believe in. - The Shirt!!!
So British AI researcher David Levy somehow got involved in the field of robotics without ever reading/viewing any of the hundreds of pieces of sci-fi on this exact topic (ie. he thinks this is an original idea of his)? Or perhaps he is aware of the sci-fi, but is egotistical enough to think that a researcher talking nebulously about the far future is somehow different than sci-fi.
Do you swap it in for better one? From iLoverGiga to iLoverTouch? Replace it with last good memory?
What if you get into fights? Go to 'hospital' and improve personality?
Granted, it will be cheaper(?) and/or easier to 'improve' and 'repair' the lover, once you bring back the dead lover one too many times, the illusion will break, I think.
There is a reason why toys can't replace pets. For every person who will never adopt one, I am certain there is another who can't live without them for their love and personality.
My God! He never took middle school hygiene. He never saw the propaganda film.
DON'T DATE ROBOTS!
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
I watched a Japanese TV program about this guy who fell in love with a life-like sex doll. Incredibly, he never actually had sex with it - he actually simply fell in love with it and went to visit it often (at the store) to just kind of be with it. I know he's likely mentally ill, but I think it shows the capability is there. Also, there are people who fell in love with video game and cartoon characters. So, in terms of human capability of falling in love with non-living things, the bar is already pretty low. That said, I have never EVER touched my Roomba in an inappropriate way.
Isaac Asimov had some very interesting things to say about this, as well as about society at large.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Asimov
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Asimov's_Robot_Series
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prelude_to_Foundation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward_the_Foundation
sigh, next we will be talking about robot sex
I think 50 years is, well, kind of short sighed. If you look at sites like "realdoll" (you add the com and www), and the recent work done in facial expression on robots, all you need to do is add an erotic eliza program, good speech synthesizer, and a pheromone dispenser and the guys will be in love.
Sorry, ladies, robots ain't fixing your car or computer for a while, so you'll have to find a way to pry a guy away from his perfect robot girl.
"Hi, I'm Teddy Ruxpin. Can you and I be friends with benefits?"
eww.
Sweet informative mod.
... me chatting up a bot somewhere, and it says: "Speak unto the digit-bearing appendage -- the aural orifice is disinclined to register your speech." Man, can't even get laid in Bot world.
You don't Date Robots; you own them. How awesome would it be if you owned your wife? End fantasy and enter reality. My wife it nuts.
Me buying stock in the lubricant industry, now!
Is that why you woman get so fat? But however, as I wrote in a slashdot journal last January titled A Nerd's Guide to Getting Laid, many of us WILL date heavy women!I broke up with the drunken bitch shortly afterward. Since then I've been dating prostitutes.
-mcgrew
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
By the laws of the universe, a Star Trek related article is soon to follow.
FAQs are evil.
I for one welcome our sex deprived robot overlords...
No need to wait. Millions of people are having sex with robots today. The problem with people seeing this is that they they forget that robot is not synonymous with android, and they miss the fact that it is women that are the primary customers in the robot sex industry.
A vibrator IS a robot. It may be a simple one, but a robot none the less. The trick will be to see if they can get men to buy into robot sex as much as women have already embraced it.
As for love... Given how many people cannot tell the difference between a human and a dog, I have no doubt that getting people confused between an even semi-realistic looking android and a human would be easy and common.
How many people look at fictional characters (from games, movies, anime, even some cartoons) as sexually enticing even if not romantically? Hell, Esurance has Erin Esurance for their "sex sells" model, rather than a real female.
I can easily see a market where you have RealDoll++ outfitted with personalities and looks of fictional characters. Yes, that includes Seven of Nine.
See the Futurama episode "I Dated A Robot" (in which Fry falls in love with a Lucy Lu-bot) for more information.
Also see Schediaphilia.
Electric Gonorrhea, the noisy killer!
God, schmod. I want my monkey man!
Scott Adams said something about 'as soon as robot sex or virtual reality becomes cheaper than dating, humanity has ~1 generation left'.
The plural form of "anecdote" is "anecdotes", not "evidence".
Oh god I thought only Penny Arcade could ruin my childhood memories of Teddy Ruxpin. Now Slashdot too?!?
Hell, I know people who've fallen in love with a well-designed coffee table.
Most mental retardation is not genetic, but environmental. My oldest daughter's IQ is measured at 65; her umbilical cord was wrapped around her neck at birth. My youngest daughter's IQ is 130.
My friend Linda, who's now in jail on a drug charge, isn't the brightest bulb on th etree but she had 14 kids, 13 of whom are still alive. She wins the Darwin race hands down; I only have the two kids.
If all the sex you have is with your hand, your genes all die.
mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
Clearly these fat women and short men are not as wonderful as you would think since the fat women won't have sex with a man just because he is short, and the short men won't have sex with women just because she is fat. Why should anyone accept either of these two groups when the fat women and short men you speak of won't accept flaws in others?
start buying up property in the Uncanny Valley before the rush.
When someone says, "Any fool can see
Hmm, you say that, but I can imagine that if there is a genetic propensity for it, it will eventually be selected against, so that people that prefer relationships with real people will have more children, and after a few generations, there might be fewer people that prefer sex with robots. We'll probably also see a rise of organizations like SWRAA (Sex-With-Robots Addicts Anonymous), and surely Christians and Muslims will strongly protest their members from participating in relationships with Robots. I wonder if being a robot owner would become a reason to be eliminated from consideration from political office.
Also, will these human sized, complicated machines be as expensive as a car, where you'll have to go to a robot dealer, get a loan, and which will seem as seedy as the local porn store or topless bar? For me, part of the thrill of dating was the risk that something might fail. If I had a relationship with a robot, I'd be taking the robot for granted, because I know there would be no need to be nice and attentive, because the robot would surely be programmed to do whatever I want, and never protest. I think this would increase robot lovers tendency to not be social, because they wouldn't have to be social to get what they want. Our western society would continue to devolve toward a less civilized society, along the lines of road rage, parental rage at children's sporting events.
It is not possible to waste time drawing a Venn diagram. The action is a reward in and of itself.
The Guide is definitive. Reality is frequently inaccurate.
I'm sure this would be good for the survival of the species.
We are in luck as there are two facts of life that will likely protect us: 1: If men cant behave that way as it is, then lets face it we aren't capable of creating robots who can. 2: The women who are capable of programming the robots who can, are also nerds and are unlikely to understand a non nerd womans needs, once the robot starts making physics jokes it'll be returned. 3: Luckily enough women out there still like men who are bad for them and the legal liability of those robots would be too high to make them worth producing.
... But are 'friends' electric?
Only mine's broke down
And now I've no one to love
If you don't get the reference, then you're just too young!
In the course of every project, it will become necessary to shoot the scientists and begin production.
Couldn't the same be argued for, say, vibrators?
. .... Hawhawhawhawhawhawhaw!
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
It'll be a lot less than 50 years in some parts of the world. Assuming of course that you give the robot a fleece and make it go BAAAA!!!! Just kidding :)
Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.
And Bolts!
(P.S. a couple of my favorite Internet authors, Elf Sternberg and DB_Story, have been writing about these types of relationships for years now.)
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
And if you don't know it's a robot?
If they get passed the uncanny valley, that will be one of the many issue involving society.
The world doesn't revolve around you.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I heard the author interviewed on the radio once - he was a total bore and he seemed to have no real insight or depth to his statements. I didn't really get the sense that he was dumbing it down for the radio audience - rather he seems to have very flat and one dimensional in his thoughts. He didn't say anything that wasn't an obvious extension of current technology and trends - and nothing that hasn't been part of SciFi culture for decades. Perhaps the book is different/better but based on this interview, I have no reason to think so.
http://ed.markovich.googlepages.com
>Now, if robots can be more emotionally responsive than men, will men do something drastic to compete with robots?
I still have the paycheck.
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
Will die off. They are self selecting their genes out of the pool.
That includes "nerds" who can't get a date or people who fall in love with a robot. I encourage you to do so. It will give my progeny/genes more resources to play with.
Deleted
Except stupidity is seldom a genetic problem, it's a teaching and training problem.
People aren't taught how to think.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Had a room of dildotic sex machines. Some were pretty elaborate.
You mean you don't own your wife? What a country!
-- Please insert another quarter
As for love... Given how many people cannot tell the difference between a human and a dog,
Look I was drunk, alright?! And the dog came on to me first!
The enemies of Democracy are
Everything you ever needed to know about falling in love with robots is contained in Cherry 2000.
--
No sig today. Maybe sig tomorrow.
BladeRunner was about? Hmmmmmm reminds me I should watch that movie again...
To err is human; effective mayhem requires the root password!
Every mechanical device fail eventually. The only variables are when and how painful...
After 3 days without programming, life becomes meaningless
- The Tao of Programming
The best part about sex with fembots is the "off" switch. Then you can just wheel her into a closet until next time.
If all males are procreating with female robots all day on the planet, and all of the females are procreating with the male robots on the planet, then no ACTUAL procreation is happening; thereby reducing the human population count severely each generation, and perhaps within 300 years, the human race will not exist anymore.
:)
Or perhaps, this may be a blessing - and a way to reduce the drastically increasing population counts on Earth. You know, because we're on the brink of overpopulation? (Japan and China being some of the most densely populated places on Earth, forcing families to only have 1 child, or pay extra for more..)
Food for thought.
127.0.0.1
You might want to consider her ways http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consider_Her_Ways
Posts, MyBio or Sig, may contain satire, sarcasm, bolded nouns be sardonic or even witty & be Church of SD
If a baby duck is a "duckling," why would anyone want to eat "dumplings?"
"Does this RAM upgrade make me look fat?"
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
People already fall in love with cars and boats, a robot seems a no brainer.
I think this will reduce even further the natality in rich countries.
On the contrary, in the poor countries, human reproduction will continue to grow at an exponential rate.
Sincerely, I just hope the software will NEVER be written by Microsoft, since a bug will be deadly (at least for men's parts).
...Welcome our new Chobit overlords!
Gotta put the reset switch somewhere else 'tho.
Imagine being rejected by a robot... "I'm sorry this isn't working for me. Calculon... He's just more similar to me. He understands me. I mean you can't even do complex differential equations in under 30 ms"
Finally, a chance for to prove or disprove the things that the feminists among us have been arguing about for the last hundred years or so! For example, assuming that there exists a reasonably competent sex-bot, so that a woman is not needed for a man to get a reasonably good physical release, we can learn the answers to:
1. Does he really love me or is he just using me for sex? (solved)
2. Why don't men treat women as equals? (no more hiding behind the old objectification defense)
3. What do men really want from a sex partner? (scary)
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
True as that may be.. Stupid parents tend to raise stupid children since THEY are the ones doing the "teaching and training".
Maybe someone can remember the title or author, but it was about a man having intercourse with a coin-operated, robotic hooker. When he ran out of money, it clamped onto him and wouldn't let go.
Freedom is free.
I think you're a bit confused. Al Gore and John Kerry were robots (although Gore seems to have become a Real Boy recently.) Bush is a badly trained chimpanzee.
Do Androids dream of electric sheep?
Great. New images stuck in my head.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
But, if it was a robot, that looked and felt just like a real woman, but, without the annoying side effects (talking back, not being in the mood, getting pregnant), why not?
I mean, all the fun, without any of the hassles of the currently available models.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
The same thing could be said about animals. I guess humping a piece of metal covered in latex that talks to you isn't as taboo as humping piece of wool that says "baaaa!." It's the same thing in my mind.
would it be against the ToS for it to level my WoW alts while I am at work?
Look I was drunk, alright?! And the dog came on to me first! Yeah, but who brought the peanut butter to the party?
I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.
Star Trek: TOS, Episode 74: Requiem for Methuselah Just watched it last night actually. Kirk falls hard for an android (but he doesn't know it she is one), and goes rather mad in my opinion. I thought he was about to sexually assault her at one point, really. Good thing M4 was around... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Requiem_for_Methuselah_(TOS_episode)
"To lead the people, you must walk behind them"
I am not talking about people having sex with dogs. They usually get them confused with human children. These trends of referring to dog owners as 'parents' and buying a dog as 'adopting' are not euphemisms for most people that use the terms. They are just an expression of their insanity.
I hate to introduce a serious note, but there's people out there who could benefit from a little bot-love. People who are disabled, deformed and badly disfigured have traditionally had a lot of trouble finding partners.
Masturbation and prostitutes are often their only access to sex. Love is something for other people. A mechanical counterfeit might be more acceptable than the alternative.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Well, there are people that are having sex with inanimate dolls (real dolls plug here), It would not be far fetched that someone would be amenable to the idea and even build a business out of having sex with robots. There are more advantages than using the regular purveyors. It's more sanitary, there are more control on the looks of the service provider and you only have to perform maintenance every so often.
The thing is, that we already have the technology to make sex robots happen... I bet a machine given the proper instruments and reservoirs would give a great hummer... the simple fact is that 1) Most guys probably aren't going to put their Little Guy into a machine with moving parts 2) Most Guys probably aren't going to put their Little Guy into a machine that has serviced other Little Guys, even if the machines are sanitized between uses and even if using an actual female is far more dangerous.
There would have to be a huge change in sentiment before this type of thing (intimate relationships & sex w/ robots) became acceptable and not a taboo that is hidden away--How many people do you know that actually admit to owning and using one of those Real Dolls?
Though I do see people falling in "love" with robots, much in the same way that people fall in love with a car, a favorite chair, an appliance. I "love" my car right now, it keeps me safe, keeps me warm, takes me places... sure any make or model car could do those same things, even another one of the same model I have, but mine has the seat adjusted just right, I know where all the nicks and scratches are, and I know all the weird littles noises it makes, just like I do with my girlfriend... where was I going with this?
As creepy as that sounds, it could be good in that, if the race survives, it will be entirely through people who don't want or need sex toys. (Or, at least, people whose wants/needs aren't exclusively satisfied by sex toys.)
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Is the nag chip an option?
does anyone have a reference to the 10 specific factors?
At the risk of taking all the romance out of romance, it would be interesting to see them listed and described.
SO YOU'RE GOING TO DIE: The Comic for Dealing with Death
Well I know that I am pretty smitten on the female voice in my GPS. She really knows how to boss me around and is usually always right... Guess I am half way there!
If it isn't broke, tinker with it till it is!
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
... in an episode of Ghost in the Shell : Stand Alone Complex. A guy fall in love with a low tech robot and make virus to destroy all the other robots of the same serie he own, to make his one unique ... but I can't imagine for now how to simulate the complex interactions who made two peoples loving each other (I mean another way that just sexual reciproque interest) ... perhaps the well named "ghost" by Masamune Shirow ... (sorry for my english pals, don't hesitate to correct my sentence, it help me to learn)
I'm pretty sure that under UK law it would be illegal if the robot looked like a minor. Would they have to come with certificates saying "This robot was modelled on somebody aged 18 or over"?
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
Sounds like a complete bitch......
Be gone from my sight or prepare to feel my flaming wraith!
ZERO ZERO ONE ZERO ONE ZERO ONE ONE! Just brushing up for my next big invention: Ethernet over Voice (EoV)
All this time I thought it was Miss Right Hand. Thanks for undermining confidence in my sexual orientation! I feel so dirty now.
This is one of those odd areas where men are the ones who are behind, as far as social acceptability of a sexual practice goes.
Vibrators are talked about and alluded to in a largely positive light in TV and movies all the time. Generally, at least for a couple generations now, the idea of a woman with a vibrator has been a turn on, or at least not a turn off. Women have Mary Kay-esque sex toy parties.
How many references to sex toys/masturbation aids for men are there in popular culture, compared with those for women? Far, far fewer, I would bet. What percentage are positive? Barely more than 0%, I'm sure. Being a guy and having any items of that sort is seen as something to be embarrassed about. Hell, I'm a guy, and I'm aware of the double-standard, and the idea still kind of weirds me out.
Socialization is a powerful thing.
Nothing like the attraction of man to cold hard steel... even if it is lifelike. Oh well, so long as it'll listen to my problems, and clean the house every now and again, I'm good. So I guess I should learn binary. I don't want the kids having to grow up in a bilingual home.
In soviet Russia, robot wife owns you!
You made a funny without realizing it: From your post, it's not unusual to be loved by anyone is a line by, who, Tom Jones?
sig sig sig siggy sig
Chii...
Wow, I think you came up with a replacement for the Three Laws. With those 10 rules, no man will ever be harmed again.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Wasn't there a Futurama about this? Yes, there was! The Lucy Liu bot...and the movie reel about little Billy!
but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
iMac, or iMac with benefits...
This reminds me of a Futurama epsiode I once saw. The message there was sex+robots=human extinction lol.
This is Slashdot! Give me the latest gadget, bug, or OS project! This ain't english class so don't confuse the two!
"Massive corn clog in port 7!"
You can't be doing it right. :-p
Mystery? Gives me a break. If you don't know or understand your partner, it's time to find a new partner. You wouldn't sign a contract without reading it first, would you? Well, you probably would, but you know it's wrong.
It's like saying, "We scientists have figured out what attracts people to good contractual agreements... mystery. Who knows what hidden terms are going to pop out and make your day." What it's all really about is satisfying mutual interest.
2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
While the relationship might fulfill all three laws, but the breakup and post-relationship could break all three! The human could be emotionally injured, and the robot could be put at risk in regards to its own existence and having to obey the order that could emotionally harm the human...
Meh, might as well enjoy the Never Questioning Sex Robot Overlords while they're still around.
So you had a crush on the 2 of 7 of 9?
If I take the time to clean it properly, and decorate it with attractive sparkly flower stickers? Is that sacrificing for the benefit of my WII?
Does my WII have to be able to reproduce itself in order to be said to benefit? Could someone love a virus or bacteria? How about a puppy? There's some kind of squishy line we which tend to imagine is concrete and solid.
P.S. I subscribe to 14 major religions and 3 minor ones. But I'm probably not going to renew 2 or 3 of the subscriptions in 2008 due to inflation in fuel and food prices. I have no private life, I have children and a wife. And my WII is imaginary.
Circumcision is child abuse.
Nope. Wife owns you.
Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
You WII is not conscious of you or your love. Its all in your mind.
;)
But calling it imaginary is just an insult to it! You should be ashamed. Now, look, its crying..
And what about your wife and children, how will you ever be able to look them in the eyes again?
Now if you can leave them for your WII, now, THAT must be love, for sure. At least from your part..
http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/
Because all of the remaining humans are over one hundred years old.
The New Scientist recently posted a list of craziest experiments, one of them being what was the minimum needed to turn on a male turkey.
It turned out a mummified head on a stick did the trick.
Though our courting rituals may be more complex (or at least appear to be to us), we're nothing more than another type of animal convinced of our own superiority. That doesn't mean we cant' fool our brains into wanting or enjoying something that doesn't contribute to the survivability of the race.
We'll find our own mummified head-on-a-stick soon enough.
To misquote Capt. Barbossa, "They aren't laws so much a guidelines."
Think global, act loco
"A vibrator IS a robot. It may be a simple one, but a robot none the less. The trick will be to see if they can get men to buy into robot sex as much as women have already embraced it"
You know. This has always puzzled me. It seems that female sexuality, despite all it's restrictions in regards of frivolities, is in fact; freer. Or in the least, less dirty.
On a gut feeling, I suspect a majority of men and women would consider a man humping his fleshlight somewhat sad, degenerate, in bad taste or whatnot.
If I did not just pull that assertion out of my ass, who here would contend that it is anything but the male counterpart to a mainstream expression of female sexuality that could "almost" see the underbelly of a Christmas tree?
I read /. to be well informed about things my husband is interested in. I have never been so compelled to contribute to a discussion before. Most of you seem to be misogynist jerks, who seem to think women are only good for sex, cooking, and cleaning, don't work, spread diseases and take your money when they leave you.
I think it's great if people men and women want to have sex with robots as a means of finding fulfilment when they are single or lazy, just like any other type of masturbation. I'm sure my husband would love to have a f*ck bot, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't want me, or would put me down.
I don't understand why anyone needs to put down women to say that they'd like to have a new fun sexual option. Everyone who thinks a robot lover would be better than a fulfilling dual human relationship probably needs to step away from the WOW and meet a real, self-realized woman. Perhaps you feel the need to put women down so you can feel better about not being able to find one who will not only have sex with you but love you as well. Please don't take your own insecurities and malign my entire gender.
Shame on you.
You know with hottie Summer playing a Terminator in "The Sarah Connor Chronicles" that's there going to be some episodes down the road with John Connor gets hot for the Terminator or vice versa.
Talk about a love doll!
'Course it would be more fun if Sarah got hot for the Terminator!
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
"The only consistent feature in all your dysfunctional relationships is you."
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
A man walks into a bar the day after he got totally blitzed there. "Bartender", he said, "don't give me any more of that Rolling Rock. Last night after I left here, I went home and blew CHUNKS!"
"Well, how much did you drink?", asked thebartender.
"I lost count after 23."
"Well, what do you expect? Anyone would puke after drinking 23 beers!"
"No, you don't understand", explained the man,..........
"Chunks is my dog."
What happens when a female wants a baby? I thought love and reproduction share some kind of connection hence the penis and the vagina.
Will the robot love you back?
Check out Tom Smith's wonderful song "Pygmalion 2.0" for a humorous and insightful look at humans, droids, sex and love. http://filkertom-itom.blogspot.com/2007/03/033-pygmalion-20.html People fall in love with their cars, boats, and computers all the time. Why would you expect them not to fall in love with a human-looking device which makes them feel fantastic?
The ship of evolution obviously favours the ones who procreate. So a species would only fail in a futurama-esque fashion if it doesn't chance upon the mutation of robot disgust/hate soon enough. Indeed it may already be present in humans. So I guess that humans are destined to hate humanoid robots.
"Look I was drunk, alright?! And the dog came on to me first!"
Hmmm, the dog must have been drunk too.
I am anarch of all I survey.
Or with everyone, not just the stupid as the robots take over, (because they can outthink us, so we let them worry about taking care of us) with that single goal in mind, they pleasure us as much as possible, keeping us happier with them than with other people where possible, so that as fewer breed, more robots are available to each. Deliberate non-violent but effective population control under the logic that with each passing smaller generation, more resources per human are available, until we fizzle out, the robots say DONE! and without any further orders, sit there and rust. (Or psosibly revive us, one at a time, so each one of us brought back has the world to themselves.)
There's no real question that this sort of thing will be widespread as it becomes affordable.
The questions are, what new problems will happen, and how will society change to reflect this obvious market.
The existence of the blow up doll market proves the existence of the sex-bot market. The biggest thing holding back sexbots now is probably that they can't be easily concealed. Real Dolls, besides being expensive are human-sized. Blow up dolls are smaller but less realistic. Neither carries the risk of certain diseases or pregnancy like casual human sex does.
If any woman thinks men don't want access to sex WITHOUT any deeper attachment, consider the bar scene.
The question is, will this remain a stigma? Many men now have Playboys, but it isn't good to let a significant other see them. Sex robots will probably have a similar view. The problem is jealousy (caused by insecurity?) We need to sit down and figure out what causes women to be so much more jealous. Stereotypically speaking, the man wants sex, the woman a relationship, and feels (rightly) that if a man has free access to sex, she has one less tool to use to keep him interested in her. (As this is a big tool in keeping a man's interest.) Women are jealous of more than just sex, anything that consumes a man's attention (keeping it from them) is the enemy, so hobbies, video games, old friends etc MUST GO! (Causing resentment on the man's part and hurting the cause if she goes too far.) So if jealousy is the cause, we have 2 options, remove the desire for a relationship or give them one.
I'm not sure how to get a woman un-interested in a relationship, any analysis of why they want one is far over my head, buried deep enough in psychology that I'd never understand. In today's day and age, relationships are pretty much not needed, unless you want to take time off work to have a kid, or don't want to work period. With everything payable by net or mail, and more constantly offered 24/7, If you don't need a relationship Still, are women right that men's lack of interest in relationships is abnormal, or are men right that women's obsessiveness about relationships is abnormal. Is a woman's insistence that she be "everything" for her man any less stupid than the man who thinks he's "God's gift to women"? Is the relationship urge driven by a sense of need, or a sense that their achievement as a woman is measured by their ability to attract (and possibly control) a man?
The other option, give all the women relationships! Shall we give them all perfectly loyal robot men, so once they feel they're secure they open up and have free sex? Should we have mandatory randomly chosen marriages for all, no divorce available, but sex not restricted to the "marriage"? With the women having nothing to lose, why not? Perhaps enforced group marriages, 20-30 people would all be "married" together, and while you could change groups, someone else would replace you. Your commune would always be there, and there'd just about always be someone there to cry your eyes out to. If Janet doens't like hard rock, take Jenny. If neither of them like skiing, when you go bring Donna. Maybe mandatory communes WITHOUT swapping would be best. Your group would be selected at a certain age, maybe 18, at which point you'd all move in together. Sex outside the commune could be banned, giving each commune sex only within themselves, limiting the spread of STDs. Given sex was more often available, you wouldn't have to look outside to less trusted sources. Wihout free marriage and divorce with seizure of assets (everything shared withing the 20-30) and no monopolizing of people allowed, men wouldn't need to fear property stolen / vandalized and would be less fearful of relationships.
Or should we men tell them "Grow up and realize the world isn't about feelings! Spread! Now! It's your biological duty!" Nah, if we tick'em off they'll really be frigid. Then again, if women like jerks, maybe this is a good pickup line.
For anyone
Why, exactly, would sex robots be public? As it stands, the closest things to them definitely aren't.
I forsee a massive market fro artificial wombs if this takes place. The more "emotionally" advanced the robots become, the more likely the citizenry will just clone themselves with their robot lovers.
Or alternatively, artificial womb technology will become strong enough to override this.
Hmm, you say that, but I can imagine that if there is a genetic propensity for it, it will eventually be selected against
Keep in mind that within 100 years or so, we'll probably be living in a world where: (1) Genetically modifying, tweaking or 'designing' your offspring will likely be highly commonplace, (2) technology may well have developed to the point where babies could grow to term in machines - there could feasibly even be robots that carry human babies to term (surrogates, presumably). The latter idea may seem somewhat repugnant to us, but for those who want children but cannot carry them for whatever reason, it's probably going to eventually be become acceptable and quite common - i.e. it'll only take a generation or two to get used to the idea once the technology arrives, and the demand for it will make it common enough.
Basically our current conceptualisations of how genetics and breeding and evolution take place our going to be almost entirely obsolete quite soon, so you need to use a different mode of thinking to analyse these things - not a 2007 mode of thinking.
I doubt will see anything on the level of the movie A.I. in that short period, but I could certainly see effective, semi-autonamous sex bots becoming a reality. At best though, you'd just lead them around on a leash or something and would have a very basic personality profile with a primary focus on the sex part of the equation, rather than the full emotional baggage package of a real person.
Most likely, the next big thing that will "cross the line" here, is some sort of very realistic AI setup with a fully computer generated avatar that will be entirely indistinguishable from having a video chat with any random man or woman out there. Even without ever physically meeting, humans already develop emotional attachments to little more than a picture on computer screen.
It's not unlikely that this will become reality in Japan first, where dating simulators have been around for decades as entertainment. However, it'll likely be the porn industry who first starts exploiting people by literally hosting dozens of virtual cyber-prostitute farm servers that will reach to vocal and visual feedback through a user's webcam and respond accordingly (and realistically at that).
Finally, expect this to sneak it's way into mainstream advertising and scram artists. Instead of spam, junk mail and telemarketing phone calls, a series advertiser-owned farms of virtual women and men will initiate video chats with random folks as a means of getting the advertiser's foot in the door. However, unlike a paid employee of a normal company who's time on the clock is too costly to waste on being nice after giving their pitch, the virtual versions won't have that limitation imposed upon them and will be free to do whatever it takes to seal a deal... including sex acts, just to do things like sell off an insurance policy.
8==8 Bones 8==8
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
The same applies to humans. Sure, you can get along very well with a person, and love them; this does not exclude the possibility that you might get along just as well with another person.
Actually, this is what happens when your spouse dies, or if they leave you- you have to find someone else.
I wrote about it - "Simple relationship mathematics". Now I can express the same idea using the terms proposed in that story: you can't have more than one yellow dot at the same time, but once you get disconnected from the yellow dot (for whatever reason), you can find another one.
The saddest poem
I want my own Chii~ I suspect that the Japanese are just hiding this technology from us westerners, and think we should petition the UN to make them share. Chii~
A common and in my opinion quite good definition of love is "when someone else's happiness is essential to your own". How the hell could anyone ever think to feel _that_ for a programmed sex-bot?
Why not? Humans already "fall in love" with mere animals that stick around merely because that's where the food is. Robots only need to be oiled. Some people already "love their cars." A robot would do a better job of returning that "love."
The real problem is that people don't know what "love" really is.
Cranky educator.
The next generation of Chobits. Maybe in a hundred years time we could generate and customize our robots to look exactly like the people we desire? Like in SIMS for example.
The Straight Dope has it as the above poster has said: between about one and four per cent. The 10% stat seems to be an urban legend based on old, slapdash research.