NEWS: Love and Robots

GEEK: Love and Robots

I went as Pris from Blade Runner for Halloween. For those not familiar with the film, she's a "pleasure model" replicant--created specifically for human "entertainment." Little did I know that my Halloween costume represented a predicted reality of the near future. David Levy, a British AI researcher, has predicted that people will be falling in love with, having sex with, and even marrying robots within the next few decades. Can you imagine robot-human marriages being universally legal before same-sex marriage? And what about same-sex-robot-human marriages? But I digress.

Levy anticipates a world in which robots will be so humanlike that they'll be capable of carrying on intelligent conversations (in normal sounding voices), expressing a range of emotions, and responding naturally to social cues.

"Pleasure models" like Pris (minus the enticing personality)--basically robotic sex slaves--will be much easier to create than well-rounded human companions.

Soon, perhaps we won't be able to easily tell these replicants apart from actual humans. Better give 'em a short life span. Levy goes into great detail on the subject in his forthcoming book, Love and Sex with Robots, which will be released on November 6.

As interesting as this sounds, a lot of it is wishful thinking. There are too many hurdles in AI to realistically expect autonomous, independent androids capable of holding an actual conversation, let alone initiating one or being capable of understanding the dialogue they receive and respond with.

As for the sexbots, it'll be a hobby for the rich elite with a secret technofetish. I doubt the high cost of initial units and the social stigma against it will motivate Average Joe to go out and buy one.

Typical pie in the sky AI boosterism. Total BS.

Why would anyone want to marry a robot anyway?

What possible purpose would that serve?

I, for one, welcome our new robot sex-slave overlords!


Also, wasn't there a print of Blade Runner somewhere where they hinted that Deckard was a replicant?

This is actually more plausible that most might think.

First, artificial intellegence has already reached interactive levels. There are websites where AI's carry on interactive conversations with unsuspecting humans. This experiment has been going on for a few years now and very few people have caught on, unless informed by the AI.

I think the catch here might be the self-awareness part. I don't think this depends on advanced circutry, or even biology for that matter. I meet alot of humans who have all the awareness of a tumor. But if this does indeed happen, it will spark new debate about the existence of... and the nature of the soul. Can humans create an entity that can be imbued with a soul? And if so, think of the ethical ramifications this will have.

As far as the sexbot thing goes... sexual tecnology onviously already exsists: vibrators, vibrating pocket pussies , fucking machines etc. A sexbot would simply be a hightech version of a blow-up doll. And it will probably sell quite well.

How many people have wished for lovers and mates that they can simply turn-off sometimes... and reprogram to our desires. Many people are emotional cowards... they don't want to have to undergo the changes, adjustments and challenges that love brings us. Too many people try to change their lovers and also too many people throw them away when they're done playing with them.

I think before we consider embarking on this "Brave New World," we should re-evaluate how we relate to each other... and resolve the fucked-up ways people treat each other.

We are talking about after all, creating a race of slaves...

I can't claim to know how it will all play out; I think ultimately it's highly feasible. It's probably more a matter of time and social dynamics. But I do hope that my sexbot doesn't use a Windows based operating system.

Not in the movie, but in the book Do androids dream of electric sheep? it was made explicit that Deckard was a replicant but didn't know it.

Also, the best definition that I've seen for AI is "Anything that a computer can't do yet."

Over the course of the next twenty years you will see an increased debate as to what constitutes an artificial intelligence as the tech boys try to hit that mark and the rest of us try to figure out why there latest endeavor doesn't count.

The director's cut hints at it, and the computer game plays along with that plot twist.

AI is already pretty advanced and complicated. But the real challenge isn't developing AI that can hold a conversation, but AI that understands the conversation being held. Self aware machines might be programmed one day, but I don't think it'll be happening within the next 30 years. Also, vibrators, fleshlights, and blow up dolls are all relatively cheap and very discrete. An actual sexbot would be highly expensive, especially the first four or five generations and would probably be harder to conceal. The point may be to develop them to the point where they seem human, but it isn't guaranteed to be foolproof and many people wouldn't be ready to take that chance, let alone spen enough money to buy a car just to hump a machine.

Maybe I need to reread the book, but I'm pretty sure Deckard took the Voight-Kampf test and proved to himself he was human, athough he was beginning to increasingly doubt the "humanity" of his job and the "humans" around him. The androids he exterminated had better desires and more will to live than the humans around him, who had become dependent on Mercerism and emotion boxes. But I know for a fact that the director's cut almost makes it completely obvious that Deckard was supposed to be a Nexus-6.

I think I heard about this.

Isn't this how the Matrix got started?

Actually, there's really no doubt in the novel of Deckard's humanity other than in the chapter where he visits the Android police headquarters and is mindfucked into doubting himself for a moment. It's a passing event in the novel and Deckard's doubt are dispelled when he gives himself ANOTHER Voight-Kamph test. This one incident in the novel is the seed from which the whole 'Deckard might be a replicant' theme in the movie was grown from.

Heh heh, robosexuals.

Dekard was a replicant.

There is no debate.

Ridley Scott has stated it flat out.

OK, OK, it's been probably 25 years since I read the book, I could easily be confused.

Wow, again!

Hm. Does he mean "people", or "men"?

I have lost count of how many "People having sex with Robots!" articles there have been.

Unlike the social rejects who will need said robots.

Fuckin' irony.

+1. Between this and SleepyLady's, uh, rise, the evidence is becoming overwhelming that Newswire writers shouldn't edit their own work.

As cool as Blade Runner is, we're not looking at the Philip K Dick Condition here. This scenario is straight out of the Japanese cartoon Chobits. But either way it's all just coffee shop philosophical debate fodder until something even remotely similar hits the market.