In 2050, your lover may be a ... robot

[DaFool]

Typically it's the introverted scientist who will try to code the woman's AI - but having no experience with women, he has no way of knowing that the female mind does not operate based on logic or randomness, but on a so far unexplained cosmic principle (many men tried to find this, but they failed).

Actually I think that's precisely the point. Many men find logical, rational women to be extremely attractive, but they are not so common.* They're the equivalent of your best buddy, but one which you can have sex with! (if you're not gay)

*women on the internet tend to be very logical

It's like having the power to design a Ferrari that won't break down on you or burst into flames, as opposed to a more solid -- although with slightly less satisfying-riding -- Honda. (Sorry, it's not fair to compare people to cars... but can't help it here.)

[Sin]

I wrote a post about love dolls on my naughty blog. The dolls are already getting eerily life like and some manufacturers have started adding pressure sensors and voice boxes in their models.
Robotic limbs are getting smaller and smarter every year. I believe it's just a matter of time before we'll start seeing some robotic love mates. I think 2050 is far to pessimistic. I believe we'll see the first generation within five years.

[Jake]

It's like having the power to design a Ferrari that won't break down on you or burst into flames, as opposed to a more solid -- although with slightly less satisfying-riding -- Honda. (Sorry, it's not fair to compare people to cars... but can't help it here.)

It's not fair on Ferrari, either - I don't recall any reports of their cars just spontaneously bursting into flames! Surely it's more like having the power to design a Ferrari which won't spin off the road and kill you and/or lump you with a huge repair bill regardless of how you treat drive it?

[luminarious]

When AI becomes spiritual/ develops a soul, then I would find it perfectly acceptable to have a relationship with him/her/it. If the mind becomes indistinguishable from a person's, and the body as well, then there really is no real difference, is there? I do not believe love is unconditional, nor do I believe it to be eternal. Because frankly, nothing on this plane of existence is, including the plane itself. I just wonder what will happen to mankind's eternal urge to produce offspring? Will we have ethereal self-conscius intelligent entities? Cybernetic children? Regular children with increased ability to do parallel computing?

[DaFool]

Jake >> Google "Ferraris burst into flames". Our country had our very own burning Ferrari:
http://lemmasoft.renai.us/forums/viewto ... 244#p33244

Sin >> Nice writeup, I needed a reminder to check your site once in a while at least. By the way, can I use some stuff on your site as pose references? Not the drawn artwork... more like the photos.

---------------------------------------

Actually, Hollywood can take the most blame for the unrealistic expectations of love that's why many people nowadays are lonely. Probably many people are not really capable of love, just compromise. It's simple companionship that matters -- soulmates are overrated.

So I'm guessing if I was a hermit... when the technology is there, I'd get a love-doll as opposed to a dog. But for now, cats, dogs, and other pets are good spacefillers for the lonely.

[Jake]

Jake >> Google "Ferraris burst into flames". Our country had our very own burning Ferrari:
http://lemmasoft.renai.us/forums/viewto ... 244#p33244

As much as I suspect that insufficient maintenance probably contributed to the death of the Ferrari in question, that wasn't really the point that I was making. The point was that I don't believe that the fantasy is anything about having a woman who doesn't randomly blow up for no good reason - I think the fantasy is far more about having a woman who you can happily mistreat, act selfishly towards, without fear of reproach or of the relationship breaking down. A real woman might not like the idea of existing only to fulfil a guy's sexual desires and do his housework, but that's not because women are irrational - the bursting-into-flames-for-no-reason analogy - it's because the woman is an individual with her own desires and needs and ambitions and so on. Similarly, a real Ferrari might spin off and kill you if you try and round a hairpin turn at 280mph, but that's not because Ferraris are bad cars prone to random failure, it's because they are bound by the same laws of physics as anything else is and the driver just isn't doing it right.

[papillon]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080617/tc_ ... Szi9Fk24cA

Despite what the article says, I don't think you can really call this a 'girlfriend'. Just a dollie.

[DaFool]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080617/tc_ ... Szi9Fk24cA

Despite what the article says, I don't think you can really call this a 'girlfriend'. Just a dollie.

Just contract a seiyuu to provide the raw template for the Vocaloid voice, use the best materials available in the figurine / PVC industry, then call her Hand Maid May.

... oh yeah, a USB or Firewire up her crotch area is a must.

[Samu-kun]

... oh yeah, a USB or Firewire up her crotch area is a must.

No waayyy... That's where her power button goes. ^_^

[DaFool]

As much as I suspect that insufficient maintenance probably contributed to the death of the Ferrari in question, that wasn't really the point that I was making. The point was that I don't believe that the fantasy is anything about having a woman who doesn't randomly blow up for no good reason - I think the fantasy is far more about having a woman who you can happily mistreat, act selfishly towards, without fear of reproach or of the relationship breaking down. A real woman might not like the idea of existing only to fulfil a guy's sexual desires and do his housework, but that's not because women are irrational - the bursting-into-flames-for-no-reason analogy - it's because the woman is an individual with her own desires and needs and ambitions and so on. Similarly, a real Ferrari might spin off and kill you if you try and round a hairpin turn at 280mph, but that's not because Ferraris are bad cars prone to random failure, it's because they are bound by the same laws of physics as anything else is and the driver just isn't doing it right.

Why is it always the assumption that if a man wants someone simple and pleasant that he intends to be an asshole towards her?

There are two types of guys in the dating game: asshole and nice guy. If a woman has been in a relationship with an asshole, it will affect her attitude later on ("bursting into flames") even when a nicer guy comes along. Same goes for men as well... my father was severely burned in his earlier relationships, and that affected his marriage later on because of the attitude he brought with him.

It's called baggage.

That's why robots are appealing -- they don't carry personal nor cultural baggage... they are fresh slates.

It may be surprising but young men are wisening up to relationship dynamics:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpYmrKPfvFA

[Jake]

Why is it always the assumption that if a man wants someone simple and pleasant that he intends to be an asshole towards her?

It's not. There are two parts to this.

Firstly, observed evidence suggests that some significant proportion of guys are arseholes to girls, and these guys tend to wish - vocally, in some cases - that their women would just do what they were told and sexually gratify them when they want and not complain at all. I expect most of this class wouldn't actually want to have a robot girlfriend unless it were inditinguishable from a human, because they wouldn't want the loss of machismo amongst their peers that it would entail, but that's beside the point.

Secondly, for the loner-geek type, it's far less about intending to be an arsehole as being afraid that they can't please a real genuine woman well enough for them to stay, so an idealised does-everything-you-want-without-complaining is safe. There's no penalty for failure. Serious question - there are plenty of women out there who it's entirely possible to get on with all the time so long as you don't do something stupid or selfish... so if you're not going to do anything stupid or selfish, why fantasise about a robot which would accept you even then? Real women use less electricity!

(Of course, this question discounts entirely the whole complexity of actually falling in love, but I'm not sure why there's necessarily going to be any difference in a guy's ability to empathise with a robot.)

I mean - forget cars, they're boring. Right now, I'm looking around for a new motorcycle; motorcycles are notably different to cars in that they're far, far cheaper, so a guy like me can actually afford the high-end stuff - the iconic Hayabusa, for example (which was the fastest production bike in existence until they - no joke - de-tuned it because it was too quick) costs £9000 new - that's less than my Honda Civic set me back. Except I don't want a bike like that at all, because I think I'd kill myself, or at least seriously injure myself. I don't think I'll ever have the confidence in my riding ability to get on something which is that powerful - sure, if I handle all the corners properly and don't do anything stupid then it's no more unsafe than any other bike, the vehicle itself is perfectly capable of going around bends at high speed, it's all down to the rider. So instead I'm getting something that I know I'm capable of managing - a nice mid-range thing with safety nets like ABS.

[rocket]

Of course, I wouldn't give one the codes to the planetary defense grid. Bad Baltar, Bad!

LOL!

The boring sex talk aside, this is actually a really interesting topic!

People have emotional relationships with inanimate objects (and their creations) all the time. Kid love their dolls and stuffed animals, and some teens their Ren'ai. Folks form deep bonds with even quite primitive pets, and it's easy to imagine robots that are at least that complex in the near-mid future.

Of course all of these *can* be a substitute for a relationship with another adult, though it seems undoubted that they would fail to carry the same 'dynamic' range of emotion and experience.

I'm with Chrono on unconditional love though.

Unconditional love is a gift, a commitment. If it could be earned then it wouldn't be a gift, but of course since it's without condition it can't be earned. The love I have for my wife (or my child) is in that sense a choice, a commitment to 'pay back' love into the relationship regardless of what's coming out at that individual moment. I think what makes that emotional is that is one hell of a gamble - total commitment - knowing that in practice we often fail to achieve our best intentions. Love is like the prisoner's dilemma, it only works if both parties play. I choose to commit with no guarantees save my choice, and that opens me up to complete emotional (fiscal and easily physical) destruction should my lover betray that trust.

Could you do that with a robot? Well I think it depends on the robot.

If the robot was of the Asimovian 3-rules variety then no. No matter what actions you took, no mater how identical on the outside your relationship might look like to that of two adults, it would be fundamentally different. Your robot could do you no harm. Even if it was a highly advanced, S&M robot. Or an emotionally torturing robot that had the capability of pushing your boundaries. So long as it has limits you've never really made the commitment of love.

On the other hand if the robot could hurt you or could adore you at their choice, and you had no control over the result. If you were really limited to the persuasions and whims of adult relationships... Well, you may not have made something that can be considered biologically alive, but certainly something that is as alive as an animal would be from an ethical perspective. The more indistinguishable they were from a human, the closer they would be to true artifical life.

However... I have a hard time imagining that this type of robot would be legal in most places.

I dunno, sound like a great Ren'ai plot to me!

[PunkDaddy]

By 2050 I don't imagine the AI will be quite there yet. I see the robots as being merely really sophisticated vibrators that take the place of prostitution and masturbation in the interim. That wouldn't be too terrible I suppose. It would actually be better to me if there was not so much an AI, but more of a programmed personality sequence.

Once the AI is worked out, then it might become a question of Darwin vs Cupid. One argument against homosexuality is that a single sex relationship cannot procreate and, ergo, must be unnatural. Thus a relationship with an artificial life form will certainly create a social stigma if it is a public romance.

Personally, I'm on the fence. I believe people should do what makes them happy so long as no one else is hurt (ie: serial killing and rape are still wrong). I should be OK with loving robots. But I'm not. Right now, I see love and robots as a cop-out to people who are unwilling to make the effort with real people and turn to emotionally undeveloped things (which inherently imply ownership). This reminds me too strongly of pedophilia (emotionally undeveloped) and slavery (ownership) for me to be comfortable. Yes, I read WAY too much into this stuff. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Maybe.

In any case, in 2050, I'm OK if my sex toy is a robot, but not my lover. Maybe my grandkids will be more understanding.

[deinarious]

Okay, I'm going to go on a rant about robots in general.

I love robots, and wish I could make one myself, but my brain is too imaginative (more suited for artistic endeavors, role playing, and possibly creating anything creative in general...)

I'm for robots that are capable of sex, mainly because there is a market for it, and after robots that are humanoid (androids and gynoids) are built, I don't see why it shouldn't be done. All you'd have to do is make sure their outer body is realistic and coated in something that is skin-like (read : hypoallergenic, rubbery substance that hasn't been invented yet), then make sure that no one invents a robot capable of rape, or one that is a child-size robot that is sexually active.

Also, PC Magazine's 25th anniversary predicted that highly intelligent robots will be available in 5-25 years, so by 2013 - 2033, we should have something like this.

Who knows, maybe in 30-50+ years, we will have something like Hand Maid May's cyberdolls : gynoids capable of pregnancy, human intelligence, and extreme attractiveness...

Who knows what science will bring? Often times, I think science fiction is an accurate prediction for this kind of stuff.

...

Just remembered something. Forget my worries on "rapebots"... The laws of robotics state that a robot cannot harm a human. That means robots for the most part will be for residential and commercial usage, along with usage for surveillance and exploration.

If anyone cares, since it is somewhat relevant, these are the laws of robotics...

• A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
  A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
  A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Most robots made will follow Issac Asimov's rules, even though they are just intended for science fiction, as most engineers of robots see them as an ideal; that when a robot realizes these laws, it will be truly intelligent.

This obviously means that military robots will never be truly intelligent, nor will such things like Battlebots.

This doesn't mean that someday robots like, say, the ones from Medabots won't ever be made for a kind of gaming sport. In fact, that is more likely to happen before sex bots are made.

In general, I give the sex robots till the estimated date of 2020-2033 to be perfected. By this time I will be around 33 - 36 years of age in this lifetime, and will have at most 25 or so years to enjoy such robots if I so choose to.

All in all though, I'd love to see robots that fight each other and look like something from anime first. That would be awesome, and I expect something like that to come around in the next 5 or so years, before sex robots.

And after that I expect to probably see companion, friend and child robots that are for those who are lonely or infertile, to follow about 5-10 years afterwards.

Then come the sex robots.

I hope you enjoyed my rant. I am saving it to my hard drive for further reference... you know, to see if my predictions are right. Most of the ones I make are.

[PyTom]

Hm... first of all, I'd ignore any predictions about intelligent robots made by PC magazine. The issues are complex enough that it seems unlikely we will have anything resembling an Asimovian robot in the next few decades.

One thing to understand about Asimovian (three-laws-based, outwardly intelligent) robots is that exist more as a storytelling device than a serious proposal. Asimov's early Robot short stories (and let's consider them to be distinct from the stuff with Elijah Bailey, R. Daneel, R. Giskard, etc.) is that they're all basically mystery stories.

They tend to be quite formulaic. A robot is behaving in an unexpected way. The robotcist comes in, collects clues, understands the situation, and finally pronounces what is really going on. You could replace robotocist with detective, and you would have a plot that's been used a thousand times before.

Actually, the robot stories have one benefit: The robots are always working by an identical and well-known set of rules. So the story is as pure as possible, and if you didn't guess the ending, it's your own fault.

The Three Laws are a literary device, with no actual bearing in reality. It seems highly unlikely that commercial robots will be sold with anything resembling the three laws, as they would be very hard to implement (how would a robot know if any of its actions could cause a human to come to harm?), and one could make a good case that for a practical product, the Third Law (protect own existence) should come ahead of the Second Law (obey orders).

Asimov's stories are great fiction, and I highly recommend reading I, Robot and The Rest of the Robots. But don't confuse them with an attempt at fortelling the future, or practical engineering advice, as that's not what they're about.