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.
"Robots started out in factories making cars. There was no personal interaction," said Levy, who also is an International Chess Master who has been developing computer chess games for years. "Then people built mail cart robots, and then robotic dogs. Now robots are being made to care for the elderly. In the last 20 years, we've been moving toward robots that have more relationships with humans, and it will keep growing toward a more emotional relationship, a more loving one and a sexual one."
Yes, Levy was quick to say that humans will have sexual relationships with robots, perhaps within five years -- sooner than most might think.
"Pleasure models" like Pris (minus the enticing personality)--basically robotic sex slaves--will be much easier to create than well-rounded human companions.
Levy said the biggest advancement in robotics will come in the form of enabling a robot to carry on an interesting conversation, have self-awareness and emotional capabilities.
Levy also estimated that robots will be able to have interesting conversations -- not yet at the level of a college graduate but enjoyable -- within 15 years. In 20 or 30 years, however, he expects them to carry on sophisticated conversations.
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.
I must agree with the above. To integrate seamlessly with humanity so completely that no one would questions their humanity/robot status is HIGHLY unlikely not to mention the implied safety risks in achieving such an autonomous AI... but I digress.
I have a feeling, in the future there will be sexbots considering how common realistic sexdolls have become (particulairly in Japan) BUT as in Cherry 2000 they will not fully replace humans as lovers or partners but act as surrogates when needed.
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.
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.
AmbientLight said:
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...
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.
StarBelliedBoy said:
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?
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.
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.
StarBelliedBoy said:
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?
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.
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.
PAGE:
1 | 2
Comments
Tyvron
Ann Arbor, MI
September 2007
NOV 04, 2007 04:11 AM
Dez
SUICIDEGIRL
Ontario, Canada
NOV 04, 2007 04:38 AM
spurge
Arlington, MA
January 2006
NOV 04, 2007 05:38 AM
StarBelliedBoy
Philadelphia, PA
December 2003
NOV 04, 2007 07:12 AM
AmbientLight
I'm lost
March 2005
NOV 04, 2007 07:19 AM
Finnegan
Kansas City, KS
July 2005
NOV 04, 2007 07:25 AM
Greybeard
Los Angeles, CA
December 2006
NOV 04, 2007 07:31 AM
Greybeard
Los Angeles, CA
December 2006
NOV 04, 2007 07:36 AM
Finnegan
Kansas City, KS
July 2005
NOV 04, 2007 08:00 AM
drummer5
Syracuse, NY
August 2005
NOV 04, 2007 09:04 AM
Tyvron
Ann Arbor, MI
September 2007
NOV 04, 2007 09:25 AM
PaulNikon
Melbourne, FL
February 2003
NOV 04, 2007 09:28 AM
Johnny_Flapjacks
Williamsport, PA
September 2006
NOV 04, 2007 09:54 AM
MschfMayhemSoap
Phoenix, AZ
April 2006
NOV 04, 2007 10:04 AM
redconsensus
Baltimore, MD
August 2004
NOV 04, 2007 11:27 AM
PAGE:
1 | 2