As chilling as it sounds, the notion of robot sex has emerged from the freaky fringe and become a new topic of debate and speculation in the mainstream. In large part thanks to Dr. David Levy's new book "Love and Sex with Robots: The Evolution of Human-Robot Relationships" published by Harper Collins in November.
An artificial intelligence expert at the University of Maastricht in the Netherlands, Levy has said that love, sex and marriage with robots is inevitable as they become more human-like with improved technology. He and others predict sex with robots will be possible in five years and that marriage to them will be legal by 2050, with Massachusetts leading the way.
He argues many people are already willing to make the intellectual and emotional leap toward mechanical love and cites the popularity of electric sex toys, the easy with which we express feelings toward Roomba vacuums and personal computers, and the increasing sophistication of "blow up" dolls.
His book has spawned reflection ranging from the factors that cause humans to fall in love, to the legality of paying for intercourse with dolls, and the possible pros and cons of robotic partners for sex offenders. Levy's next work is to pen a paper on the ethical implications of our treatment of robots. In the meantime, we can all review our Philip Dick.
Comments
Job says:
You know, unless robots will be able to get pregnant (I feel like I should make a joke on intelligently designed realdolls here, but I can't think of any), I think natural selection will eliminate the need for lovebots in a few generations.
December 14, 2007 11:42 AM
Job says:
Also:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7714940296885574087
December 14, 2007 12:02 PM
madrikh says:
Yes, Philip K. Dick wrote about robot sex, but for a very different (and rollicking ) take, see Fritz Lieber's The Silver Eggheads
December 18, 2007 3:16 PM
Tom says:
Victoria -
When the sex robots can clean, wash, vacuum, cook, watch football and not have any programmed mood swings, I would be interested. :)
December 18, 2007 4:57 PM
Michael R. says:
We already have various means of artificial reproduction, or artificially assisted reproduction, including the artificial womb. Thus, I believe that the first poster's claim to elimination (of robot lovers who cannot become pregnant) via natural selection to be premature, and probably wrong.
One forgets that culture, and its agents, also conducts a great deal of 'unnatural' selection--not based upon reproductive fitness/capability, but upon utility.
And the State may play a selective role here as well--mandating robot dolls for sex offenders (as was alluded to in the news item), or using robots in therapy for sexual trauma victims. Will such uses/robots be akin to a 'Schedule II' drug--permissible only
via the prescription of doctor or psychiatrist?
And then there's just plain ol' human loneliness...
But we should be mindful of the unintentional consequences here, such as the effect of easy access to such robots ('ero-bots') on marriage and divorce. On the other hand, they might just save marriage...its all too soon to tell.
Of course, these developments may all be radically altered once the issue of 'robot rights' is broached. If our 'technologies are forms of life' (Langdon Winner, 'Autonomous Technologies'), then a robot (with AI, bio-sensors, and learning heuristics) most assuredly is a 'form of life', and the consideration of exactly what form of life it is (different from ours enough that we can make it a 'slave'), and consequently, its rights, becomes inevitable.
I can already see the bumper sticker:
Robots are people too.
MR
December 18, 2007 5:35 PM
Loaf says:
The robot lover would have to be a creationist as it is in reality the product of Intelligent Design. If the robot did not believe itself to be the product of ID it would be as irrational as a creationist. I would never date a creationist or an irrational robot. Sentient beings who suffer from such delusions frighten me. Although the robot creationist would in fact be rational the parallels to their human counter parts is still chilling.
December 18, 2007 6:23 PM
Serge says:
Job,
Let's not jump to conclusions, mate. Natural selection has not eliminated homosexuals so far, so robots may have a future, too.
December 19, 2007 2:09 AM
Sps says:
Job
Whores don't get pregnant, and they sure are not getting eliminated by natural selection. Catharsis of sexual pressure does not need long term relations.
December 20, 2007 9:07 AM
Ms. Grindle Beazwachs says:
Beauty may be only skin deep, and in the eye of the beholder, but physically unattractive people will always bear the burden of prejudice against what is, after all, the happenstance of their physiognomy. Erotic simulants could provide the opportunity for physically unlovely people to experience what is usually reserved for the fortunately lovely - or wealthy. Moreover, the benefits to public health and social justice would be phenomenal; Prostitution as an exploitative business could be effectively subverted. Disingenuous seduction and other forms of dishonest guile and coercion in the quest for sexual gratification could be avoided if a reasonably convincing, seemingly willing synthe/synthess were available. Fringe proclivities could be visited upon unfeeling androids/gyndroids instead of the living. Indeed, the exploitation of human beings as means to an end may all but vanish... and wouldn't that be nice?
January 2, 2008 8:28 PM
Scott says:
Blade Runner was a good movie.
January 29, 2008 2:50 PM
Steve Pehnec says:
Where can I sign up to be a beta tester? And how much do I have to pay?
January 29, 2008 3:32 PM
Add a comment