techstepgenr8tion
Veteran
Joined: 6 Feb 2005
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,691
Location: 28th Path of Tzaddi
18 Jan 2017, 9:54 pm
19 Jan 2017, 2:11 am
19 Jan 2017, 10:19 am
Alliekit wrote:
Datalis wrote:
You guys aren't thinking, this could be a good alternative to people who have STDs and HIV and don't want to transmit to anyone. Condoms really aren't that great with preventing diseases.
What if people bought like second hand robots or shared them
I think what would happen would be is when some old guy dies, he'd leave his bot to some younger guy who'd inherit her, take her to a bot shop, and have her modified to suit his prefs. Memory wipe would probably be standard, then a bod mod, a core reboot, pairing to the new owner, and the bot is good to go. I think this would also be a good incentive for owners to treat their bots decently in the bargain.
19 Jan 2017, 12:29 pm
Zed90230 wrote:
Alliekit wrote:
Datalis wrote:
You guys aren't thinking, this could be a good alternative to people who have STDs and HIV and don't want to transmit to anyone. Condoms really aren't that great with preventing diseases.
What if people bought like second hand robots or shared them
I think what would happen would be is when some old guy dies, he'd leave his bot to some younger guy who'd inherit her, take her to a bot shop, and have her modified to suit his prefs. Memory wipe would probably be standard, then a bod mod, a core reboot, pairing to the new owner, and the bot is good to go. I think this would also be a good incentive for owners to treat their bots decently in the bargain.
Certain viruses can last on items for year (namely the bloodborn kind) and when you have sex micro tears occur on the penis making you sucxeptable to disease. So secondhand sex bots or shared sex bots could be bad for you. Although i supposee you could bleach or autoclave but I'm not sure if that would damage the bot.
19 Jan 2017, 12:38 pm
You've given this a lot of thought 
20 Jan 2017, 10:13 am
TheSpectrum wrote:
You've given this a lot of thought
Of course!
David Levy has given it a LOT more thought---he wrote a whole book about it (Love And Sex With Robots).
Dr. Kathleen Richardson has also given it a lot of thought---she put up a website and a vid telling everyone why she thinks mechanized romance would be a bad thing. She is obese and has a nose like a carrot, so it's not hard to understand her POV.
20 Jan 2017, 10:41 am
Zed90230 wrote:
TheSpectrum wrote:
You've given this a lot of thought
Of course!
David Levy has given it a LOT more thought---he wrote a whole book about it (Love And Sex With Robots).
Dr. Kathleen Richardson has also given it a lot of thought---she put up a website and a vid telling everyone why she thinks mechanized romance would be a bad thing. She is obese and has a nose like a carrot, so it's not hard to understand her POV.
Really? Why judge her like that, your making assumptions based on her looks when she may have some very real points. Good you can't even be a Dr without people judging you based on your looks
20 Jan 2017, 10:47 am
20 Jan 2017, 1:41 pm
20 Jan 2017, 1:44 pm
20 Jan 2017, 1:50 pm
20 Jan 2017, 2:01 pm
Zed90230 wrote:
Not everybody is a pervert who wants to f. robots (or f. anything else either). Some of us have gotten nothing but unkindness when we needed love the most, so I see nothing wrong with turning to mechanized love.
It baffles me how we have no problem with mechanized agriculture, mechanized transportation, mechanized warfare, etc etc... but yet we find the idea of mechanized romance to be such a low blow?
It baffles me how we have no problem with mechanized agriculture, mechanized transportation, mechanized warfare, etc etc... but yet we find the idea of mechanized romance to be such a low blow?
A low blow?
(pun on words)ok, time to pull my mind out of the gutter.
20 Jan 2017, 2:09 pm
TheSpectrum wrote:
You've given this a lot of thought
Ha! I was thinking the exact same thing then I saw your post!
20 Jan 2017, 11:37 pm
nurseangela wrote:
If they made one for women that would listen and give them its undivided attention, that would be a total turn-on.
I agree... especially if he could mow the grass and take out the garbage!
23 Jan 2017, 4:33 pm
Zed90230 wrote:
nurseangela wrote:
If they made one for women that would listen and give them its undivided attention, that would be a total turn-on.
I agree... especially if he could mow the grass and take out the garbage!
Omg! That would be my dream guy! I'm already trying to get Alexa to dust and make the bed - not working because she needs a body! I did send off for some nice floral clothes for her (they had to be specially made - what in the heck is going to fit a cylinder for Christ's sake?!)
24 Jan 2017, 2:28 am
Zed90230 wrote:
It baffles me how we have no problem with mechanized agriculture, mechanized transportation, mechanized warfare, etc etc... but yet we find the idea of mechanized romance to be such a low blow?
that is because romance and affection is a much more personal, intimate affair than getting from point A to B, neutralizing enemy forces, and plowing your fields.
IMO love can only be provided by another human being, and despite all the boasting from the engineers in that field, and those who fund them, i don't believe we will ever completely accurately simulate a human mind's nuances, flaws and experiences with a computer program anytime soon. it will be a very unsettling uncanny valley until we perfect it, if ever, and incomparable to finding a thinking human.
some people like to keep humans and machines separate.
machines of war, of agriculture and of transportation are much more widely accepted now because they are not required to take on humanoid personalities and THINK, merely following electronic commands and working some gears is all they are required and expected to do. nobody expects a car to have the same thought patterns as a teen girl, or anybody else.
though i imagine attitudes were different back when these technologies were new.
having said that, i feel one upside to "loving" a machine is the ability to turn it off when you don't need, or want it...
