Slashdot Mirror


Man Builds 'Scarlett Johansson' Robot From Scratch (mirror.co.uk)

An anonymous reader writes: 42-year-old product and graphic designer Ricky Ma has spent more than $50,000 building a replica Scarlett Johansson robot from scratch. The robot, named Mark 1, responds to a set of programmed verbal commands spoken into a microphone and has moving facial expressions. Ricky said, "When I was a child, I liked robots. Why? Because I liked watching animation. All children loved it. There were Transformers, cartoons about robots fighting each other and games about robots. After I grew up, I wanted to make one. But during this process, a lot of people would say things like, 'Are you stupid? This takes a lot of money. Do you even know how to do it? It's really hard.'" Ricky has dressed Mark 1 in a crop top and grey skirt. A 3D-printed skeleton lies beneath Mark 1's silicone skin, covering its mechanical and electronic interior.

95 of 158 comments (clear)

  1. This... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ...is creepy as fuck.

    1. Re:This... by whipslash · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd bet quite a few Slashdotters wouldn't mind having this robot

    2. Re:This... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      While probably true, I bet the robot still has more personality than SJ.

      pointy knees

    3. Re:This... by zenlessyank · · Score: 4, Funny

      Nope. Just you. ;)

    4. Re:This... by Ixtl · · Score: 1

      Sure, who wouldn't want a horrifying automaton of their favorite film star to haunt their nightmares?

    5. Re:This... by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think the designer has crossed over from the Uncanny Valley to the top of Restraining Order Mountain.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    6. Re:This... by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

      No, we all want a Cherry 2000: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      The most creepy/bizarre part of the movie is the "Hokie Pokie" scene . . .

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    7. Re:This... by beatle11 · · Score: 1

      I agree 110%. I wonder if she even knew about it.

    8. Re: This... by Diamon · · Score: 1

      I was hoping for April Fools

    9. Re:This... by QRDeNameland · · Score: 1

      I vaguely remember this film, but the creepiest part to me is that it was set in 2017.

      --
      Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
    10. Re:This... by smallfries · · Score: 1

      So its set after Trump wins the election?

      --
      Slashdot: where don knuth is an idiot because he cant grasp the awesome power of php
    11. Re:This... by thegarbz · · Score: 2

      That's a nice 6 digit UID you have there. It would be a shame if something were to happen to it :-)

    12. Re: This... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It sounds like you might also have zero social intelligence, because otherwise you wouldn't have written your comment the way that you did. I don't particularly like aspies, for various reasons (mainly because I'm a very social person, and I feel uncomfortable when other people are uncomfortable), but pretending to be, or actually being a social justice warrior is one of the most annoying things ever. You sound like the sort of person that would accuse someone else of being "racist" if they said something that disagreed with your personal viewpoints.

    13. Re:This... by zenlessyank · · Score: 1

      I'm not scared.

    14. Re:This... by oakgrove · · Score: 1

      Wait, are we talking Trump or Hillary winning here?

      --
      The soylentnews experiment has been a dismal failure.
    15. Re: This... by vandamme · · Score: 1

      I know a few Jebbies, and they're all smarter than hell, and fun guys besides.

      I don't know Pope Frank personally, but from the stories bout him, he seems he'd make a nice neighbor even with his bad English.

    16. Re:This... by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Naa, it would have to be Natalie Portman, naked and petrified covered in grits to interest your average /. patron.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    17. Re:This... by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Honestly, does it matter? They are both awful candidates.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    18. Re: This... by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      That decision took it from possibly a sweet job offer to possibly that restraining order.

      I'm still trying to work out what grounds there might be for a restraining order. From whom against whom? Who is being harmed here? What "intellectual property" is being violated?

      This is essentially a somewhat animated sculpture. So, if a restraining order were granted, then the next step would be, for an example, for the Estate of John Wayne to be sueing every kindergarten child (and their teachers and school boards, who probably have more assets to rip off) who draws a picture of "the wild west" including someone with a characteristic wide-legged stance.

      [Gets popcorn] This is going to be entertaining.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  2. The Real Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What we're all asking...

    1. Re:The Real Question by flghtmstr1 · · Score: 5, Funny

      Does it run Linux?

    2. Re: The Real Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I want a beowulf cluster of them!

    3. Re:The Real Question by PvtVoid · · Score: 3, Funny

      Does it run Linux?

      The real question is does it run systemd.

    4. Re: The Real Question by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

      Wrong actress!

    5. Re: The Real Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Meh, that's just a head swap away.

      Natalie-bot: "I love you more than the moon, the stars, the [POETIC IMAGE #36 NOT FOUND]"

    6. Re:The Real Question by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Does it run Linux?

      Most, yes, except the pussy runs Windows: that makes it more like an actual wife.

    7. Re: The Real Question by Pezbian · · Score: 1

      Petrified? I thought that was a Userfriendly comic meme?

      --
      In a world of the blind, the one-eyed man is king--and the two-eyed man is a heretic.
    8. Re:The Real Question by Alumoi · · Score: 1

      Of course not!
      Windows 10 with Tay the chatbot interface.

    9. Re:The Real Question by tlambert · · Score: 3, Funny

      Does it run Linux?

      The real question is does it run systemd.

      The motion is quite jerky, it has an unexpectedly high latency, and it has bad English.

      So I would tentatively say "yes".

    10. Re:The Real Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The real question is does it run systemd.

      Fuck systemd. Literally.

    11. Re:The Real Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      finally! a way for us to have angry sex with systemd.

    12. Re:The Real Question by maroberts · · Score: 1

      The motion is quite jerky, it has an unexpectedly high latency, and it has bad English.

      So I would tentatively say "yes".

      Windows it is then

      --

      Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
      Karma: Chameleon

    13. Re:The Real Question by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      Yep. Everyone's wondering: What happened to the Marilyn Monroe and Lucy Liu prototypes?

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  3. The best part by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's exactly as expressionless and personality-free as the real thing!

  4. How many times has he fucked it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Was it any good?

  5. Re:It's 2016 and this is the best there is? by elrous0 · · Score: 1

    You post is much funnier when read in Arnold Swartzenegger's voice.

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  6. Is it, uh.... by khelms · · Score: 1

    "anatomically correct"?

    1. Re:Is it, uh.... by r1348 · · Score: 2

      Yes, down to the teeth.

    2. Re: Is it, uh.... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Anomalocaris Nataliea Portmus

    3. Re: Is it, uh.... by Hawks · · Score: 1

      That would be the Jess Weixler doll. Guess there is a new use for G-Strings, dental floss.

      --
      in anima Apparatus
    4. Re: Is it, uh.... by beastofburdon · · Score: 1

      What the fuck did I just read?

  7. "Scratch" is not the term i would have used. by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    don't want any STD references, please.

  8. Androgenous nomenclature by billybob2001 · · Score: 1

    The robot, named Mark 1

    Isn't Mark a male name?

    1. Re:Androgenous nomenclature by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      [named Mark 1] Isn't Mark a male name?

      Maybe that's what "she" did to his back

  9. What I'm talking 'bout by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now THIS is news for nerds.

    I don't want to read the article, because it might be something lame, but I like to think I live in a universe where there is such a thing as a Scarlett Johansson robot. Does anyone know if they're selling them yet? Asking for a friend.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:What I'm talking 'bout by zenlessyank · · Score: 1

      Sorry. You will have to step away from the cyborg. They don't like wood.

    2. Re:What I'm talking 'bout by narcc · · Score: 1

      You can safely read the article. It is indeed a robot that looks like Scarlett Johansson. It can move its arms, grab things, make a range of awkward facial expressions, etc. You won't be disappointed.

      Well, when I say it looks like her, I'm just guessing. I'm not very familiar with the actress. The article does provide a photo for comparison, and the robot looks a bit better. (With some exceptions, of course. Those hands are the stuff of nightmares.) It's possible that Mr. Ma used a younger version of her for reference.

    3. Re:What I'm talking 'bout by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

      grab things

      I'm in.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re:What I'm talking 'bout by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You might want to practice with a hot-dog first.

    5. Re: What I'm talking 'bout by meadow · · Score: 1

      You guys are laughing but wait until someone comes out with The Stud Mark I with a thingie that is indistinguishable from a real one. And it won't have a beer gut, forget to shave, and take showers.

    6. Re:What I'm talking 'bout by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      You might wanna RTFA before putting your deposit down. This thing is extremely creepy.

      Also, if it ever did go on sale, it would probably be sued into oblivion for copyright infringement on Johansson's image. The first "your sex doll looks too much like me" lawsuit is going to be interesting.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    7. Re: What I'm talking 'bout by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 1

      The funny thing is, it's cliche to make jokes sex robots and about men being losers and pigs, but in reality, women have been buying disembodied robotic penises for over a hundred years.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    8. Re: What I'm talking 'bout by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      Does the Scarlett model come with, ummm, that thing you said? A friend wants to know.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    9. Re:What I'm talking 'bout by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

      Right of publicity, to have exclusive rights to sell your name and image off for products, but this cannot stop, say, unauthorized biographies and other articles and stories.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  10. Re:Which one by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

    I'd order the 'Ghost world' (2001) version of Ms Johansson. When robot girlfriends become a reality, not only will men choose celebrity lookalikes (see 'Futurama', 'I, dated a robot'.), but teen-aged celebrities.

    I prefer the slightly more grown up Scarlett:

    http://esq.h-cdn.co/assets/cm/...

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  11. It's something by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

    This scratch stuff is pretty versatile. Food, interesting objects, and now pretty women.

    --
    The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  12. Re: an automated love doll ? dude has issues! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    How soon? I just want to make sure I am out of your bed before you get in

  13. Re:an automated love doll ? dude has issues! by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 2

    Have you actually tried both?

  14. what'll be the unintended/unexpected consequences by shoor · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...of sexbots when they become uh significantly functional?

    Will there be a Darwininan selection process where only people who really want children will have them, so eventually everybody wants to have children and is a competent family man/woman?

    Will women be relieved that all the jerks have gone off with their sexbots and aren't bothering them anymore?

    How many of men and boys that start out wanting a sexbot will grow out of it and learn to appreciate the real thing and how many will be permanently spoiled and never be able to adjust to the give and take of a relationship with another real human?

    How many older men, who have had relationships with women, even relatively successful ones, will just decide it ain't worth the work anymore and go for a sexbot?

    How many women will want sexbots?

    --
    In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they're different. (Yogi Berra & A. Einstein)
  15. from scratch by tehlinux · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is there a kit?! I'm asking for a friend...

    --
    Most linux users don't know this, but the man pages were named after Chuck Norris. Chuck Norris fsck'ing hates noobs!
    1. Re:from scratch by Maelwryth · · Score: 1

      No, but there is probably a kitty.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      --
      I reserve the write to mangle english.
  16. Re:from scratch [Kit?] by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    Are they customizable? I'll order 3 of these.

  17. Re:what'll be the unintended/unexpected consequenc by mark-t · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Assuming that one day. they can create robots that are indistinguishable from human beings with regards to outward appearance, to tactile sensation, and with respect to how they would interact with people, I expect that the ultimate consequence of robots that can effectively function as complete companions, including as a romantic partner, would be that the only people that would seek romantic relationships with other real people are those that want to procreate.

    Oh, and to answer your last question, probably most of them.

  18. A Small World Disney ride anyone? by WarlockD · · Score: 1

    All I thought, when I saw the video, is the old ride "Its a Small World" Like those 40 year old animatronics that sing and try to open that damn prison. Don't get me wrong, its amazing he did this at all, especially for the budget. I am sure now that he knows what he is doing he could do it even at half the cost or less. While, at-least for me, its on the low end of the Uncanny valley, it just feels/sounds/looks so robotic for me to consider it even real.

    Still, the 3D print of the rib-cage and pelvis was cool, even if that itself felt creepy:P

  19. Re:Binary by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    Cornflower blue.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  20. Re:what'll be the unintended/unexpected consequenc by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    We'll worry about that when there is a bona fide robot that feels and acts exactly like a women.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  21. Re:what'll be the unintended/unexpected consequenc by fluffernutter · · Score: 1

    ... minus all the bitchy parts that people usually make jokes about.

    --
    Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
  22. This man is in serious need of a real girlfriend by khz6955 · · Score: 1

    'You know, I've been searching for someone
    Who can share that special love with me
    And your eyes have that glow
    '

    Computer Love...Zapp & Roger

  23. Re:what'll be the unintended/unexpected consequenc by Alumoi · · Score: 1

    What? Bitch and moan about everything? Act like hurricanes (come wild and wet and leave with your house and car)?

  24. Re:It's 2016 and this is the best there is? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I vant a Scarlett sex baht zat is in-distinquish-able from ze real one! Give it to me nao!

    NAO

  25. Re:an automated love doll ? dude has issues! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    No need, comparing real people and sex bots is comparing apples and oranges.

    Real relationships are about more than just sex. Even when engaged in sex, it's about more than the mechanical aspect. When you touch your partner and they shiver with pleasure it's a very different feeling to when you touch them and they pretend to shiver with pleasure because they think that's what you want, or because the robot was programmed to. In other words, it's about forming a connection with another sentient being that feels the same way you do.

    So while sex bots can cater to certain needs, sure, but not all of them. It won't be until robots become good enough to accompany us in everyday life and hold a natural conversation that we see people really replacing human partners with them out of choice.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  26. Re:what'll be the unintended/unexpected consequenc by serviscope_minor · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ha ha it's funny because women, eh? Amirite fellas? Fellas?

    --
    SJW n. One who posts facts.
  27. FAKE! by Mats+Svensson · · Score: 1

    If you wish to make an Scarlett Johansson robot from scratch, you must first invent the universe. And i don't think he did.

  28. Re:what'll be the unintended/unexpected consequenc by swb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Until some point in the 20th century, prostitution was widely tolerated. Brothels operated more or less openly, and even if they were illegal, widespread corruption allowed them to operate anyway. I don't think there was much in terms of unintended consequences for the nature of human relationships.

    Sex bots I don't think would change all that much, although it would be interesting to see how the forces of moral purity would challenge their commercial implementation. Would they try to ban sex bot brothels?

    I'd wager that the women gaining political rights and economic abilities equal (or nearly equal for nitpickers) is largely what eliminated the accepted levels of prostitution that used to exist. Women with economic and political rights gained the upper hand in terms of sexual power and forced men to negotiate more and give women more sexual control.

    Women largely operate as a sexual cartel and seek to eliminate competitors who don't adhere to the cartel's pricing requirements. Sex for pay weakens the bargaining position of women generally by requiring a higher level of compliance with women's interests. When men can obtain sex for money relatively easily, women lose some of their bargaining power.

  29. Are you a pleasure model? by SocietyoftheFist · · Score: 1

    Weak! Lame!

  30. Which script? by sremick · · Score: 2

    So which of the 50 or so domains trying to run scripts on this page actually need to be whitelisted to just play the video?

    1. Re:Which script? by mujadaddy · · Score: 1

      Amazonaws.com, brightcove.com & brightcove.net

      --
      Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
      "Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
  31. Re:what'll be the unintended/unexpected consequenc by Kjella · · Score: 1

    Will there be a Darwininan selection process where only people who really want children will have them, so eventually everybody wants to have children and is a competent family man/woman?

    Between a welfare system so you don't need to have children support you, contraception, morning-after pill and legalized abortion doesn't the vast majority already choose to have children? It's not like you need sex bots to have sex without reproduction, it might cut down on one night stands and prostitution but those rarely lead to children anyway. It doesn't make them good parents, in fact our medical and social system is likely to make sure all of them survive to adulthood almost no matter what. What most parents want are someone to love and be loved by, whether they're capable and competent is often not much of a factor at all. And what they think and reality over the next 18 years will be different.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  32. Dear Slashdot friends by AbRASiON · · Score: 2

    I really recommend you go to google images and type in the following 3 words.
    ancilla tilia scarlett

    You will not be disappointed.

  33. Re: an automated love doll ? dude has issues! by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 1

    AmiMojo, we all know you have a robot penis in your bedside table, so get off your high horse.

    --
    -1 Uncomfortable Truth
  34. Re: what'll be the unintended/unexpected consequen by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 1

    God how I can relate to this....

    --
    -1 Uncomfortable Truth
  35. IP? by seven+of+five · · Score: 1

    If S.J. lawyers-up, this guy's toast...

  36. Re: an automated love doll ? dude has issues! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

    I prefer the left hand Suzuki method.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  37. Re:what'll be the unintended/unexpected consequenc by jader3rd · · Score: 1

    Well, if we get to the point were half of the men are either gay, or prefer a sexbot for a companion, bigamy is going to become the norm. If society has a 2:1 ratio of women to men wanting to be with actual women, that's just what's going to happen. In that instance a man knows that he'd better remain worthy of a wife (or two), or his woman will just walk off and get hooked up with another man; because in some sense no good man will ever be unavailable. Thereby getting him stuck with just sexbots for the rest of his life.

    Once bigamy becomes common enough, and everyone will have been born into a bigamous relationship, it'll be even more acceptable to just leave an abusive man and find a good one. Women who have a good man will realize that they shouldn't prevent others of the sisterhood to enjoy the happiness they're enjoying, just because they got to the nice man first.

    Women have had sexbots for the history of humanity; they're the other half of the species.

  38. Not all creepiness is created equal by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

    You know what seems creepy to me? The preoccupation many people have with worrying about what other people find personally appealing.

    Guy likes his robot. So what?

    My personal concerns are what I like and what any partner of mine likes.

    Here are the metrics for my concerns with others in this area: Informed consent. That's it. That's all of it. Do issues of informed consent come up with a non-conscious robot? No. Not at all. Ergo, it's only a matter of interest in the sense of here's something in the personal behavior spectrum someone else is interested in... and then considering whether I would be interested in such a thing, or not.

    There may be (probably is) a legal issue with Johansson's likeness; I wouldn't consider such an issue valid in terms of "should there be a law", but I would not be the least bit surprised if this was something he ended up having to deal with, because legal systems such as ours and the UK's, quite unlike other people's personal and consensual activities, is inherently creepy.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  39. Re:what'll be the unintended/unexpected consequenc by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

    Sex bots I don't think would change all that much, although it would be interesting to see how the forces of moral purity would challenge their commercial implementation. Would they try to ban sex bot brothels?

    A "sex bot brothel" that did not also offer human or conscious robotic services would be a matter of the customers making personal choices for themselves.

    Would people interfere with such personal choices? Consider the current circumstances:

    o Laws against various types of consensual sexual acts are widespread ("sodomy laws")
    o Texas has laws specifically against sex toys
    o Laws against gambling are widespread
    o Laws against drug use are widespread
    o Laws based on pathological definitions of "informed" are widespread

    So I think it is clear that laws against "brothels" that utilize non-conscious robotics as sexual tools are extremely likely.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  40. Re:what'll be the unintended/unexpected consequenc by swb · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think most of it isn't aspirational or conscious at all, I think it's mostly evolutionary biology behaviors that border on instinctual. I don't think women get together and strategize on the best way to obtain the benefits of male relationships with minimal sexual compliance, nor do I think men (effectively, anyway) strategize on how to obtain sex from women with the smallest amount of effort.

    I think evolutionary biology, though, has ingrained sexual behaviors into cultures and maybe even as instinct into people to match desired outcomes with sexuality. For women this means stable mates who will contribute materially to raising offspring, and for men this means women who are sexually compliant and monogamous to produce offspring that are their genetic progeny.

    I think the economic model of a cartel is an interesting way to look at the social organization of sexual activity. Women act in surprisingly uniform ways as a group towards various aspects of sexuality that suggest a cartel. Women tend to be very critical of other women who are promiscuous, for example, much like a cartel does when one of its members violates the pricing rules. Prostitution is just a form of promiscuity that is profitable for both parties. Older women frown on older men with younger women, as it threatens the artificial valuations the cartel wants to impose -- the older woman is an inferior product (appearance, ability to successfully bear healthy children, etc) whose pricing normal market mechanisms would discount, however the cartel always wants to impose its own pricing mechanisms, seeking uniform pricing levels regardless of the product quality.

    It's also interesting how economic externalities, like job equality and legal equality, influence the cartel pricing arrangements. The cartel itself is somewhat under attack, as its own members now question their pricing model. They still have a product on offer, but they don't know how to value the exchange they receive for it. Some value it low -- women with good job prospects may engage in sex more freely, as they no longer value the material stability of a marriage partner. Some eschew the value completely, disengaging from male sexual relationships. This chaos in the market is somewhat evident from reading publications oriented towards women, and the hand-wringing over sexuality, men, even lesbianism as an alternative lifestyle.

    On the latter topic, I'm kind of amazed at the number of stories I've heard lately of acquaintances who have been married and even had children who end up divorced because their wife "discovered" they were lesbians in their late 30s or 40s. This kind of "discovery" would have been unheard of a century ago, and I think more closely reflects the kind of disruption in gender and sexual identity as women leave their childbearing years and no longer have the maternal instinct for childbearing. While some of these women may actually have been social prisoners of a culturally imposed sexual identity, I think its difficult to believe that ALL of them were. I think a more compelling explanation is that these women more likely had no compelling economic interest in their husbands and when combined with a naturally declining libido as they entered the sunset of their childbearing years and are actually making a much more conscious lifestyle choice that simply abandons men as a desirable partner.

  41. Re:I almost forgot, questions about couples by shoor · · Score: 1

    How many couples will want to stay together but have his and her sexbots on the side?
    How many couples will want one sexbot on the side for threesomes?

    --
    In theory, theory and practice are the same; in practice they're different. (Yogi Berra & A. Einstein)
  42. If you like that by phorm · · Score: 1

    You'd probably get a real hoot out of the article linked from this story (which I'm assuming may be NSFW)

  43. Because, women? by phorm · · Score: 1

    Indeed. Now lets all sit back and watch some commercials about how men are stupid and inept instead, because apparently that's perfect fine, right-o?

    1. Re:Because, women? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      because apparently that's perfect fine

      Ah I see, now you get to the stage of randomly accusing me of saying stuff I never said, as if that somehow makes my original point invalid. Firstly, that's a nice simple logical fallacy. Secondly, when did I ever say that was fine?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    2. Re:Because, women? by phorm · · Score: 1

      Not you specifically, just the double-standard of the world at large.

  44. Germany by phorm · · Score: 1

    In many countries (Germany, for example) registered brothels are still legal. Those who work there pay taxes and undergo regular health examinations.

  45. Re:what'll be the unintended/unexpected consequenc by Whorhay · · Score: 1

    "Will women be relieved that all the jerks have gone off with their sexbots and aren't bothering them anymore?"

    This brings to mind the saying "Everything is about sex, except sex, that's about power." I've probably got that wrong but it's how I remember it going.

    I think in many cases men who are jerks to women, seemingly only in it to get laid, are behaving that way to feel power over someone else. If it were only about getting their rocks off they'd utilize other more expedient methods to save money, time, and drama. So while anatomically functional robots might reduce this problem I don't think it'd be a large change.

  46. Multiple versions of the story by Nunya666 · · Score: 1

    I heard about this guy and his robot on the radio today, but their version was slightly different. The radio version said the guy was just trying to make a "female robot" and that it "just happens" to resemble Scarlett Johansson.