Robots that freak us out.

[Viking]

The really interesting question will be how massive the hand wringing will be when child-sized sex-bots hit the marketplace.

Or a related question about how that be covered by the law against cartoon depictions of children in porn.

I think the broader question is worth considering as well--would life like sex bots completely upset gender dynamics?

I think that in order for that to happen, the sex bots would have to be able to pass the Turing Test - otherwise they hardly replicate actual sex with a person, as opposed to simply screwing a toy. 

Problem with that is, if they could pass the Turing Test, would they be satisfied to remain sex bots? 

To be honest, much regular sex between living breathing humans is mere assisted masturbation, which is what sex-bots would do. Strangely enough sci-fi keeps suggesting that sex-bots will be subject to emotional responses from their users. I'd suggest that they would have exactly the same effect as porn. For the same reason I think that the emotional response to the killer death robot sent from the future to keep you alive as in T2 felt by the young john connor is equally silly.

[Malthus]

Wow.

I would have expected that most people's sex lives is better than that ...

Anyway, I simply can't imagine that sex with no emotional or affectionate feelings whatsoever would ever be a commonly acceptable substitute for sex with.

[Admiral Yi]

Anyway, I simply can't imagine that sex with no emotional or affectionate feelings whatsoever would ever be a commonly acceptable substitute for sex with.

People get emotional and psychological pleasure from playing video games.  Why not fucking a bot?

[Viking]

Wow.

I would have expected that most people's sex lives is better than that ...

Anyway, I simply can't imagine that sex with no emotional or affectionate feelings whatsoever would ever be a commonly acceptable substitute for sex with.

hmmm... it seems you missed out on getting drunk partying and having emotion free casual sex while at university...

[Warspite]

Wow.

I would have expected that most people's sex lives is better than that ...

Anyway, I simply can't imagine that sex with no emotional or affectionate feelings whatsoever would ever be a commonly acceptable substitute for sex with.

Well, for a start a sex bot won't expect me to have croissants and orange juice ready for it in the morning. That's a big plus.

[Malthus]

hmmm... it seems you missed out on getting drunk partying and having emotion free casual sex while at university...

Even then part of the excitement was that some hot chick was willing to do it with you. Remove that, and totally emotion-free sex would pall, I'd think - at least for a significant number of folks.

That said, if sex bots were a-okay with a lots of guys, that would be good for the rest of us - if we were on the market as it were - just as long as chicks were not into them, too. 

[Malthus]

Well, for a start a sex bot won't expect me to have croissants and orange juice ready for it in the morning. That's a big plus.

Yeah, but imagine your sex bot would get mighty cranky if you don't have numerous D-cells available in the morning.

[Ideologue]

The really interesting question will be how massive the hand wringing will be when child-sized sex-bots hit the marketplace.

Or a related question about how that be covered by the law against cartoon depictions of children in porn.

I think the broader question is worth considering as well--would life like sex bots completely upset gender dynamics?

I think that in order for that to happen, the sex bots would have to be able to pass the Turing Test - otherwise they hardly replicate actual sex with a person, as opposed to simply screwing a toy. 

Problem with that is, if they could pass the Turing Test, would they be satisfied to remain sex bots? 

Probably.  I don't think the Turing test is necessarily a proxy for consciousness; I'm sure it's not a proxy for agency or "free will."

[Ed Anger]

Sex robots? Nerds. 

[Malthus]

Probably.  I don't think the Turing test is necessarily a proxy for consciousness; I'm sure it's not a proxy for agency or "free will."

Well, considering it isn't proven that people have "free will' ... 

Point here is that unless a sex bot has some element of choice, or at least a convincing illusion of same (*see note concerning whether people have 'real' choice above), it is never going to adequately replicate for the user the satisfaction of a human relationship, because part of that satisfaction is the ego-gratification that being chosen provides.

Of course, if they have a convincing illusion of choice, what's the point? A hot sex-bot is never going to choose the sort of loser that would want a sex-bot. 

[Tonitrus]

Sex robots? Nerds. 

The current generation hasn't been exposed to the lesson from "Cherry 2000". 

[Viking]

Even then part of the excitement was that some hot chick was willing to do it with you. Remove that, and totally emotion-free sex would pall, I'd think - at least for a significant number of folks.

That said, if sex bots were a-okay with a lots of guys, that would be good for the rest of us - if we were on the market as it were - just as long as chicks were not into them, too. 

As a personal aside I have found that, even with the blank emotionless sex, that if there isn't a positive desire on her part I quickly lose interest. So, her desire is a necessary condition for me to carry on. I don't have to be in love or even like her, I just have to be convinced that she wants it as well.

From my point of view the sex-bots can't have desire. They are neither agents nor persons (look up the phrases in a philosophy dictionary) That's why I think sex-bots can't work. The uncanny valley means that the robot is either fake or creepy.

[Ed Anger]

Sex robots? Nerds. 

The current generation hasn't been exposed to the lesson from "Cherry 2000". 

Great, that movie just flashed in my mind. 

[jimmy olsen]

The really interesting question will be how massive the hand wringing will be when child-sized sex-bots hit the marketplace.

Or a related question about how that be covered by the law against cartoon depictions of children in porn.

I think the broader question is worth considering as well--would life like sex bots completely upset gender dynamics?

I think that in order for that to happen, the sex bots would have to be able to pass the Turing Test - otherwise they hardly replicate actual sex with a person, as opposed to simply screwing a toy. 

Problem with that is, if they could pass the Turing Test, would they be satisfied to remain sex bots? 

To be honest, much regular sex between living breathing humans is mere assisted masturbation, which is what sex-bots would do. Strangely enough sci-fi keeps suggesting that sex-bots will be subject to emotional responses from their users. I'd suggest that they would have exactly the same effect as porn. For the same reason I think that the emotional response to the killer death robot sent from the future to keep you alive as in T2 felt by the young john connor is equally silly.

There are plenty of men alive today with emotional attachments to their car or motorcycle so I don't think that's a silly prediction at all.

[Razgovory]

Wow.

I would have expected that most people's sex lives is better than that ...

Anyway, I simply can't imagine that sex with no emotional or affectionate feelings whatsoever would ever be a commonly acceptable substitute for sex with.

Viking is weird.  I think years of drilling oil wells has given him strange concept of sex.