Would you own a robot sex machine?

[Flying Pig]

Uh-huh... when contraceptives or condoms fail, that usually results in people having children without planning to do so. And please don't try to suggest that every rapist is considerate enough to insist on birth control/condoms before committing their crimes.

Do you really think births as the result of rape have a significant effect on the overall birth rate? Also, I don't think failed contraceptives do, usually, result in unplanned children, at least not from people actively trying not to have children - in this country and nearly all others where we might be seeing intelligent robots in the near future, that doesn't have to be the end of the matter. Moreover, we can expect basic contraceptives to improve over time, which is going to make that even less of an issue.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Do you really think births as the result of rape have a significant effect on the overall birth rate? Also, I don't think failed contraceptives do, usually, result in unplanned children, at least not from people actively trying not to have children - in this country and nearly all others where we might be seeing intelligent robots in the near future, that doesn't have to be the end of the matter. Moreover, we can expect basic contraceptives to improve over time, which is going to make that even less of an issue.

I'm not getting into an argument about statistics. I don't do statistics. All I'm saying is that rape can, and sometimes does, result in unplanned pregnancies.

People who use contraceptives are not planning to have children. So when a contraceptive fails, the result is an unplanned pregnancy.

 

[Flying Pig]

I'm not getting into an argument about statistics. I don't do statistics. All I'm saying is that rape can, and sometimes does, result in unplanned pregnancies.

People who use contraceptives are not planning to have children. So when a contraceptive fails, the result is an unplanned pregnancy.

Right. The post you responded to was talking about 'people who have children without meaning to do so', in the context of the worry that robot-human relationships would cause a demographic crisis. That is not the same as 'people sometimes have unplanned pregnancies'. Nor can you ignore the numbers involved and fudge it to 'sometimes'. You've swept past both of those, with the result that I can't really see that you added anything useful.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Right. The post you responded to was talking about 'people who have children without meaning to do so', in the context of the worry that robot-human relationships would cause a demographic crisis. That is not the same as 'people sometimes have unplanned pregnancies'. Nor can you ignore the numbers involved and fudge it to 'sometimes'. You've swept past both of those, with the result that I can't really see that you added anything useful.

Whut?

Let's review the post I responded to:

As I said, we can take as pretty much zero the number of people who have children without planning to do so, especially if we're assuming that access to the knowledge, goods and services required for family planning is only going to extend in the period between now and the invention of relationship-worthy AI.

Do you see the words "demographic crisis" there? I don't. You basically said that nobody has children who are unplanned, and I'm saying you're wrong.

 

[Syno]

In theory I see this as being an excellent aide for extraordinary circumstances. I don't think it'd be a suitable replacement for real intimacy, though. Moments of sexual desperation or peculiar situations (such as being disabled, just suffered a breakdown, etc) would make robotic assistance superior over the alternatives, but I personally find it difficult to consider this a viable complementary addition to someone's personal sex life if they're sane or capable.

 

[Flying Pig]

Whut?

Let's review the post I responded to:


Do you see the words "demographic crisis" there? I don't. You basically said that nobody has children who are unplanned, and I'm saying you're wrong.

You're cutting in on half a conversation: I was responding to:

View Post
It's only really a problem of "Wait, how are we going to continue replacing old people dying with new babies if everyone's dating robots?". What other problems are there?

To which I argued that the robots won't really affect the problem, because we're already getting towards a situation where there are few unwanted babies being born, and can only expect to get closer as technology and social expectations develop in the sort of direction that would enable you to think about 'marrying' a robot.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

You're cutting in on half a conversation.

You can see for yourself what portion of your post I chose to quote and reply to. You can't claim I'm wrong about something I didn't quote and never intended to reply to in the first place.

 

[Martin Alvito]

Which story, and which character? Or are you referring to the I, Robot movie? (I haven't seen that, so I'm asking for clarification). I've read some of Asimov's robot stories and while I recall the character of Dr. Susan Calvin being deceived by a robot due to a bizarre interpretation of the Three Laws, I certainly don't recall her having sex with any of them.

The Robots of Dawn, Gladia. If you haven't read the robot novels, you should correct that when you have time. Top-notch.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Okay, thanks. I'm more familiar with Asimov's nonfiction essays than his fiction, and have read more short stories than novels.

 

[warpus]

I did. Your post seems to imply that relationships between humans and qualia-free robots ('catgirls') will become accepted eventually, and that you do not find this objectionable.

You're the one introducing qualia into the conversation, not me. In a bid to sound smart or something, I presume...

Anyway, no, in my initial example that you quoted I was talking about AI which is equivalent to a human level of intelligence in the ways that matter. Not just an empty shell.

 

[Flying Pig]

On the subject of qualia, what reason do we have to believe that an artificial intelligence - I mean a machine that can learn and create original knowledge, rather than simply a sufficiently extensive database - would not perceive them?

 

[Manfred Belheim]

Because they don't have a soul, duhh.

 

[Daw]

In fact, if we put a really deep thought, we all are nothing but biochemical androids already, really.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

Don't be silly. Everyone knows that consciousness in humans is the result of an invisible "pilot" who sits in the centre of our brains and receives all the input. It would be ridiculous to even suggest it might just arise spontaneously from a complicated system. Therefore no robot can ever achieve consciousness. Fact.

 

[CavLancer]

Okay, I don't think any other women have replied to this thread (not surprised at that)...

No, I am not even slightly interested in owning any sort of robot (humanoid or otherwise) for any purpose other than housework and maintenance (fixing furniture, changing ceiling light bulbs, taking out the garbage, cleaning the litter box, and so on).


Here's my discussion re: your "drama/understand them" crack:

Women are individuals, not sitcom or "chick flick" characters.

Some consider individuals to be the sum of their experiences. While I see this as a rather myopic view, it works as far as my decades of experience with women before I left the US.

I searched for a woman who was cooperative and not contentious, but no. Perhaps it was all bad luck! Interesting that you brought up sitcoms, aka soap operas, or "The Days of our Wives" -Cav. Basically daily training which turns the lovely young women one gets involved with into tedious drama queens regurgitating the latest episode at night after work all over a tired, unsuspecting bf or husband who only wants to be at home and at peace with the family.

My one request upon meeting and falling in love with my 2nd wife, just before proposing, was that she never start watching these damned things. She agreed, I proposed, it was really romantic. This October will be 20 years of blissful marriage, 20 of the best years of my life. She feels the same. My amigo Zkribbler has said that ours is the best marriage he's ever seen. I know this to be true because he is from SoCal.

So, been through a lot of relationships looking for Miss Right. At one time I gave up completely all dating as a pointless waste. In those years if a good walking talking facsimile of a cooperative woman had been on the market I might have succumbed to temptation and got one. This would have likely kept me from taking one last roll of the dice and coming to the Philippines looking for my ideal. I'd heard good things... A lot of guys who fail in their search in the West wash up here, country is full of them. Some don't work out, granted that's usually the guy's fault. Some old guy getting into his head that this 18 year old chick really loves him. They get what they deserve. I was 39 and my wife 27? iirc when we got married. No weirdness in either one of us, she is a rock that gives me love, great stability, and not an emotional dramatic nightmare. We're adopting 2 great kids and its paradise!

So lets say I'm wrong and through decades of dating and one marriage I was just totally unlucky. If so, sorry.

 

[CavLancer]

I could write entire books and essays about the unfortunate implications of these two sentences.



The 1960s?



Why not? I can judge people who own them the same way I judge people who own waifu pillows.



You know, I browse OT a lot. I browse OT from the comfy heights of a cabal of elitist users who regularly point to threads we find amusing with the unfortunate implications or downright silliness. So few threads reveals the key demographic of this board than this thread.

The question of whether an intelligent machine can someday meet the legal definition of "personhood" in a country, become a citizen, and get married is an interesting question and one that has been a staple of sci-fi for decades.

Too bad this thread just frames it as "hey dudes, say you get this robot chick that's totally 'respectful' and 'rational; (unlike real women amirite guys?), wouldn't it be great if we could marry the robots"?

Jesus. Christ.

Product of the 50s.

I'm glad I could fulfill your OT browsing fantasies, this makes me happy.

The only way to frame this thread in the particular frame of mind I was in was how I framed it. No regrets.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I need to know the price of this robot sex machine, so I can assess the opportunity cost. I mean, if I can pay for one just by skipping the sandwich I plan to get this afternoon, that's one thing. If I have to schedule a job replacing a garbage disposal and waste a couple hours that I could be here asking silly questions, that's another. If I have to run down to the nearest car lot and sign on as a salesman for the next six months, obviously that is out of the question.

 

[CavLancer]

I'm guessing all three plus.

 

[Daw]

I'm guessing rental service will come up to hit the prostitution hard.

 

[Borachio]

Rubber dolls have been around for ages. And apparently popular enough for someone to consider it worthwhile manufacturing them.

Would I want to have sex with one? I don't think so.

A robot sex machine is just one step up, isn't it? A bit more like a human being than a rubber doll, but still nowhere near human.

Still, I suppose there's the same sort of advantages that you might have with a robot dog. If you don't feed it, or you do go away on holiday for six months living it home alone, no one is going to report you for mistreating it.