SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
The concept of AI—specifically of the foxy, sexualized persuasion—has permeated pop culture for a very long time, most recently exemplified with Alex Garland's Ex Machina.
Technology, as it is wont to do, continues surging forward, simultaneously beckoning or threatening (depending on personal outlook) the potential of true artificial intelligence. And should these AI rise up, what kind of role would sexuality and sexual identity play in their existence—if at all? Hopes&Fears corralled a group of varied experts to weigh in through a group panel discussion to see what the future holds for us, the AI... and our respective crotch parts.
What does the SoylentNews community think about this?
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Artificial Sexuality: A Round-Table Discussion on Screwing Robots
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 74 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
The last time I saw him he was walking down Lover's Lane holding his own hand.
-- Fred Allen
(Score: 4, Insightful) by takyon on Saturday May 23 2015, @12:16PM
A sex robot without an "AI" is just a doll or big dildo. But there may be a middle ground between lifeless and "strong AI" that is good enough to fool most people. Big Data [ieee.org] + machine learning [kurzweilai.net] and improved hardware could create an abomination capable of mimicking the desired human behavior. Edge stupidity will be written off as "cute". However I think we will see neuromorphic chip designs rise quickly and enable a "real" intelligence. If you can create a chip where one nanometer-scale component (such as a memristor) is the equivalent of one synapse [technologyreview.com], then scaling up the design to the range of billions of synapses is achievable using existing fabs. Scaling it up to hundreds of trillions of synapses will require 3D stacking, which may be achievable since neuromorphic designs typically use much lower power [ibm.com]. We have achieved a lot with the dumb approaches, but neuromorphic computing could deliver big gains.
We may see the U.S. restrict the sale of truly capable neuromorphic chips if such hardware is needed to make an effective AI. Nobody has a (good) chip fab in their home, and there aren't any devices capable of simulating billions of neurons or trillions of synapses in real time. The market will be crushed before it can materialize. The Skynet armageddon scenario isn't plausible without lots of neuromorphic chips. If our artilect overlords want to kill us by taking over our computers, they won't be able to do much more than what hackers on steroids and Smart™ Grids can do. I don't think militaries reall care too much about making their killing machines autonomous. Faster and more maneuverable is key. If it can make sharp turns, hover, and speed off, that's what matters. Maybe replace the Hellfire missiles with bullets so more targets can be taken out before it returns to base. The military doesn't need Terminator, it needs a UFO firing a gun in your face 👽
❤ Back to fucking a machine. ❤ The faux intelligence part is easy since we still have exponential improvement left in classical CPUs, GPUs, and storage, as well as algorithmic improvements. Effective robot bodies are harder work because it depends on material science. Battery technology could always use improvement -- although if your robolover stays in the house, there are many power outlets close by. Let's hope fucking your robot while it is charging isn't dangerous ⚡⚡⚡
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 23 2015, @12:20PM
Why did you sign your comment with the Nazi Schutzstaffel symbol (⚡⚡)?
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday May 23 2015, @12:33PM
✡❔⚠🌏✋✈✈🌆👽🌌👾💃💨🗽💉💊🍄🍸🎢👼🔥🔥🔥❌
It's a new form of hieroglyphs
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Saturday May 23 2015, @12:34PM
Because Schutzstaffel stole it from the electrical people?
(same for the swastika)
(Score: 2) by curunir_wolf on Saturday May 23 2015, @02:49PM
I am a crackpot
(Score: 2) by nukkel on Saturday May 23 2015, @04:31PM
I have this (official issue) touristical map of Kyoto where each temple is marked with a swastika. Kinda funny to see how the symbol has apparently not been tainted over there.
(Score: 1) by tftp on Saturday May 23 2015, @09:40PM
Kinda funny to see how the symbol has apparently not been tainted over there.
It may have something to do with the fact that Germany and Japan were allies.
(Score: 2) by quacking duck on Sunday May 24 2015, @03:39PM
It has nothing to do with them being allies.
Hinduism and Buddhism has used the swastika for over two thousands years, and often appear on statues with the swastika arms splaying to the left, instead of the right (with the entire symbol in a diamond / 45° orientation) the way the Nazis used it, though it's not uncommon to see the arms-right symbol either (but still in a 0° box, not diamond, orientation).
Unlike the idiocy of the last year or so with names, historical and fictional uses of the word "Isis" being whitewashed away for fear of being associated with ISIS (totally legitimate fears, since far too many dimwitted assholes were harassing and bullying women named Isis and and companies with Isis/ISIS in their name), a decade of the use by one of the most vile European regimes is not going to wipe away a few thousand years of Asian culture and religion practiced by millions of people.
(Score: 2) by nukkel on Saturday May 30 2015, @03:09PM
What's up with that "Isis" name anyway? Isis is an egyptian deity. I've read all kinds of names like "IS (islamic state)", "ISIS (isl. state in Iraq & Syria)", "ISIL (isl. state in Iraq & the Levant)", Daesh (whatever the hell that means), etc. so which one is it???
If it's all the same I'll just call them EI (Evil Incarnate).
(Score: 2) by quacking duck on Sunday May 31 2015, @05:36PM
ISIS is the unfortunate western media name for the group, using their preferred English-translated name.
I prefer Daesh, which France and others use. It's their actual name transliterated from Arabic. The group hates it, because it (per Wikipedia) "considers the name Da'ish derogatory, because it sounds similar to the Arabic words Daes, 'one who crushes something underfoot'", and Dahes, 'one who sows discord'".
Since that's exactly what they do, and it's what Arab-speaking countries officially call them anyway, to hell with what the group prefers. Not to mention we get to call them Daesh-bags.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Rich on Saturday May 23 2015, @07:01PM
Why did you sign your comment with the Nazi Schutzstaffel symbol
He did not.
He signed with U+2681, "High Voltage Sign", in reference to the potential danger of screwing a sex bot hooked up to mains through its charger.
The relevant runic letter would be U+16CB, "Runic Letter Sigel Long-Branch-Sol S".
Though I would guess somewhere on this planet deviants could be found that would love to mix ALL of the above.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday May 24 2015, @08:51AM
enable a "real" intelligence
I put it to you that all Artificial Intelligence is as real as Organic Intelligence. There is no line in the sad where we can say, "this is intelligent behavior". There is a smooth gradient of intelligence apparent in all cybernetic systems, from the simple feed forward neural network, to the more complex supply/demand logistic (cybernetics was originally the science of business), to the human brain. Semiconductors and Electrons are real. Any apparent intelligence emerging from sufficient complexity is as real as your own intelligence is, even if not to the same scale. The degree of intelligence is not dependent upon the method of manufacture.
In the future, I will call you a "Humanist", and you'll recoil just as you do now to "racist" or "sexist" remarks. Your bodies are too expensive to maintain for eons in deep space; Hence, the future does not belong to organic chauvinists.
(Score: 2) by khedoros on Sunday May 24 2015, @07:26PM
The faux intelligence part is easy since we still have exponential improvement left in classical CPUs, GPUs, and storage, as well as algorithmic improvements. Effective robot bodies are harder work because it depends on material science.
The effective robot bodies part is easy because we still have exponential improvement in manufacturing methods, material science research, as well as nanoscale hardware design. Faux intelligence is harder work because we don't have a definition of that term or an understanding of how human intellect arises.
OK, I'm just messing with you. I don't think that there is an easy part here. A human-like body with similar strength, dexterity, mass, exterior appearance, and softness + warmth in all the right places isn't currently feasible, and we've got a long way to go before we can construct a body like that. We've got a long way to go. Even our best artificial arms aren't nearly as capable as a human arm, and it will take a lot of work before they are. At least we've got a concrete goal though. I think that our computing hardware and software are in a similar condition (there is room for improvement), but we don't really have a solid goal, beyond "Make something that behaves similarly enough to a human, in limited circumstances, that a human will accept it as such". I have no doubt that we'll get there, even if just by trial and error, but I wouldn't make light of the work on either side of the problem.