If you got a virus at a sexbot brothel would your car start in the morning and would it respect you?
Humans have had to compete with C cell batteries for a long time. Like anything sexual, it should NOT be introduced to someone until Mother Nature has had a shot at it (or Father Nature for you Woody Allen fans).
I’m currently about 20,000 words into a novel called Jetta 3000 about a sexbot and the guy who owns her and the woman who loves him. He’s a recent divorcee who’s having control issues and finds that a sexbot is just a lot less threatening to him emotionally.
The thing I found interesting in doing research for the story is how many of the technologies needed to make a functioning sexbot have already arrived via other projects, in a very James-Burkeish sort of way. Frex, they’ve already developed artificial skin to help burn victims recover. Work is being done on artificial hands because of their usefulness in factory work (they’re not there yet, and once they get this one solved, we really are not gonna NEED a labor force, which could be a very good thing but will probably be a very bad one – but I digress). Research on armatures that can imitate bipedal and quadrepedal gaits is proceeding for remotely controlled vehicles and for military apps. Actually, walking isn’t a skill that’s absolutely required for sexbots, but I bet they’ll have it.) Sexual conduct can easily be treated as just another expert system, and if you program the sexbot to link to the Web and function as an intelligent agent for you it could undoubtedly become that well-informed companion who always wants to talk about what you’re interested in.
Other problems for a sexbot include imitating body warmth and imitating skin “tone”.
On the other hand, longer, more flexible tongues seem very feasible. And why should a sexbot have just one vagina just because people do?
As for cleaning, I have a scene in my story where the Jetta unit goes to the bathroom after sex, and her vagina, anus and mouth pop out of her body, and she emptys them into the sink, gives tme a good scrubbing, and puts them back in place. I really liked the scene because one of the thigns that intrigues me about the story is thinking about the Jetta unit as a real piece of tech instead of another iteration of “the Golem.”
The very lifelike sex dolls are called Real Dolls, I found them fascinating but not all that close to being “sexbots.”
All I can say is that the issue of sexbots was thoroughly addressed in the movie Cherry 2000.
The conclusion: Melanie Griffith won out.
Well, Evil Captor, a walking and shagging robot is going to need a fantastically advanced program if you don’t want it to accidentally crush the owner during certain delicate manoevres-
just standing upright requires a lot of strength in the servomotors.
and really, a humanoid robot could be a dangerous thing -
the ‘preprogrammed responses’ are going to have to be very comprehensive, with many safeguards.
There is no way I can imagine such an artifact working efficiently without it having at least a semisentient AI in control of it, and therefore it is a candidate for sentient rights
Sci-fi worldbuilding at
http://www.orionsarm.com/main.html
Seriously, for the purpose of this discussion, let’s assume that rudimentary AI is all that’s necessary. It’s a complex enough issue without sentience coming into play. If you want to debate sentient rights, it seems that a thread on the subject would be fascinating.
I’d imagine that, whatever standards are set for sentience, manufacturers of sexbots will do everything they can to make sure that their bots fall far outside those parameters, so as not to incur legal problems.
I’m also not sure that walking or standing would be a necessary skill for early model sexbots. So, there would be time to perfect the software before the bots would need to take a lot of strength into account, I’d imagine.
And now, the idea of a sexbot’s blue screen of death has me intrigued. The ideal, I think, would be the bot going limp, staring upwards, and saying “Beige. I think I’ll paint the ceiling beige.”
My reaction to the idea of sexbots is pretty much the same as my reaction to “love dolls” of any type.
First, violent shuddering, desire to take a shower, etc.
Second, the feeling that if someone’s needs can be entirely satisfied by a sexbot, they probably shouldn’t be dating real people. To me, keeping those who date just so they can have sex OUT of the dating pool, making them LESS able to hurt fellow human beings, isn’t really a loss at all. You’d rather be with your sexbot than with a real human? Fine, if you don’t see human beings as having an advantage over sexbots, better that you NOT get involved with one.
The only problem I can see from sexbots is that they wouldn’t make the urge to have a baby go away. People who have spent their lives getting gratification from sexbots rather than having to form actual close relationships will likely not be able to deal with other people quite as well, which can’t have positive effects on their child-rearing skills.
Obviously, the solution is baby-bots.
One author has written extensively about this. His stories are on www_asstr_org (NOT work friendly). Do a search for fembot.
I really am not qualified to say how much strength would be required in the servomotors, nor am I a programmer. But it seems to me that some fairly simple limitations on how much force the sexbot exerts would do the trick.
There is no way I can imagine such an artifact working efficiently without it having at least a semisentient AI in control of it, and therefore it is a candidate for sentient rights
I don’t see this at all. A set of paradigms for movement, a couple of expert systems for behaving sexually and conversing – programming is one of the easier aspects of designing a sexbot. Creating an armature that can imitate natural human movements, that’ll be tough.
Point is, none of it calls for tech that’s completely beyond what we have now. I still think sexbots are a few years down the road – 30-100 years before we have a commercially available pornstar you can keep in your closet when not “in use.”
This is a pretty common reaction among women, and I just don’t get it. Every guy already carries a sexbot or three around in his imagination, the ones who pop up when he indulges in sexual fantasy. EVERY guy. Frankly, a sexbot, however advanced short of AI, would be just another masturbatory aid. There’ll be no sense of reaching out and connecting with another human being with a sex bot. Some few guys will allow themselves to think they have an emotional relationship with a sex bot, but they’ll be sad cases generally.
Still, every guy will have a sex bot, just for sex. That won’t keep them from dating and marrying, for the sake of the human connection an emotional relationship provides. It may well change the nature of purely sexual relations between men and women. It’s gonna be hard for your average woman to compete with a sex bot that looks, smells, and feels like a movie star and has all the inhibitions of a porn star.
C’mon. No way that’s a fair contest. The sexbot in Cherry 2000 was purely a McGuffin. She was onscreen for less than five minutes all told. Plus, Melanie shoulda played the sexbot.
Good call on the time-frame – I’d go for the long end of the estimate, depending a lot on the evolution of processing power (for a good AI that fits inside a humanoid head) and materials/power supply (so the 'bot weighs as much as a human and can run for >24 hours between recharges). Thinking about that… development of humanoid-mimic ‘droids would probably be driven by research into cyborg-ing for replacement of regular humans’ body parts. Economics, so far, favor purpose-designed robotics over mimicking the highly-flexible but kludgily put-together human; but humans who lose major body parts may be quite willing to pay a premium to be rebuilt with functional AND “anatomically correct” arms, legs and face-socketed eyes vs. functional but “mechanical” tracks, manipulators, and webcams wired to the optic cortex.
Back to the implications – someone above mentioned something about “prostitution sex and masturbation prices”. I dunno about that. In terms of price, availability and ease of access there’s no beating (haw, haw) masturbation. With the technology involved in a sexdroid, using it exclusively as such would probably make for an extremely expensive toy, so you might as well bundle a household servant/handyman/bodyguard program with it so as to make it useful the other 23 hours of the day. And since you could have a perfectly good household-servant 'droid at a C3PO level of aesthetics, or simply and relatively cheaply hire any of a billion humans for straigth domestic service work, it will still cause whispers if your housedroid simulates a hot chick, or a studly hunk.
One question that would be raised is what if the proud owner of a mint-condition 2072 Carmen Electrica starts dating and even gets to marrying some nice human lady – Would the new Mrs. Geek expect Mr. Geek to sell “Carmen” off or reprogram it for gardening, or would she let him keep it as a “hobby project” so he can spend Sunday afternoons customizing and upgrading. There ARE people who get so far into their rebuilt motorcycle, or their on-line MUG, or their stamp collection, that it interferes with their marriage. Imagine if it’s instead a babe-bot or hunk-bot. Now, I would suppose it would work as for guys who own a large classic porn collection… keeping in mind THAT is a lot easier to keep out of the way and off the reach of the children, than a full-sized humanoid.
I get it (and I’m not a woman) - I just can’t feel anything but revulsion(personally) for the idea.
It would just be viewed as high end masterbation. I can’t see that it would curb anyones desire for a real live companion. I mean sex toys are already available and there still seems to be a lot attempts at marriage;) It may seem a bit wierd if the toys start talking back though. I always assumed the real break through in that area would be something like they show in the movie Strange Days. Completely virtual.
But kneeling would be an absolute must. 
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
Please tell me this is just a product of Scylla’s hilariously twisted mind, rather than a real commercial product. There are some things that one prays there’s an insufficient market for!
Ooh, interesting thread. A couple more questions I’d like to toss out there -
What about jealousy? MrVisible wondered how one would feel about having a partner who uses a SexBot, and beyond the sheer dynamics of maintaining a working sexual relationshp between the two human partners (given the presence of an ever-willing bot), I’m wondering what sort of emotional stress it would lead to. Would you resent your partner’s use of the bot as intrusive on what is otherwise an exclusive relationship? Perhaps you’d always have that lingering fear that the bot was better than you in bed… and maybe you’d be right!
What if you find out that your boyfriend/girlfried has a Donkey SexBot, or a Child SexBot? Would that freak you out more than his/her use of a George Clooney or Angelina Jolie SexBot? Could it wreck your relationship?
And then there’s teens. Would Mom and Dad get Suzy a sexBot for her sweet sixteen, in the hopes that it’ll keep her from getting knocked up (resulting in a much less sweet seventeen)? Let’s suppose they already know she’s sexually active with humans. Or would it be a horrifying social ill, for the innocent little flowers that are the worlds high schoolers to be boinking machines?.. I’m guessing the whole concept wouldn’t be received happily by the great minds that came up with Abstinence Only education.
Reading through this thread, looks like lots more questions than answers. And though I’m thinking hard about them, I’m damned if I have any answers. Other than that I think the invention of the SexBot would be a good thing, overall. Besides simply easing sexual frustration, it could potentially slow the spread of STDs, and prevent unwanted pregnancies.
What about static builld up, could I expect a spark to leap from my Bot-wrench after servicing it?
Honestly though, stick a 4-slice toaster onto the back of one of these honeys and I will send you cash through the post today.
Just stick a hat on a Dyson mister and your ready to rock and or roll.
If one wanted to marry one’s sexbot (or even/especially one’s inflatable doll :D), here’s the ideal church for it.
That was my point, actually. I’m not saying that anyone who has a sexbot for a little recreation occasionally should never date ever. I’m saying that people who either have no desire for an emotional relationship whatsoever or can make themselves think they have one with their sexbot… those are the ones that it would comfort me to have out of the dating pool.
As for the shuddery reaction - it’s the same one I get over things like, say, realdolls. And most of the guys I’ve mentioned them to/laughed about them with also think they’re creepy. Granted, I don’t tend to hang out much with “average” guys, but most of the ones I know seem to be concerned that their partner be actually interested in them. Not necessarily love them, or even feel any real emotional connection, just actually WANT to have sex with them.
I’m kind of confused about the “Every guy already carries a sexbot or three around in his imagination, the ones who pop up when he indulges in sexual fantasy. EVERY guy.” comment. I’m not naive, I realize that people have sexual fantasies, sometimes very often, that these things are healthy and normal, etc… but is a figure in a sexual fantasy necessarily a sexbot, and not just an imaginary/real human who wants to have sex with the person fantasizing? I’m not saying nobody fantasizes about actual sexbots. I’m just questioning the assertion that EVERYBODY fantasizes about sexbots.
I guess I just don’t get the motivation behind having sex with someone/something unless it wants to have sex with you. Trying to duplicate the physical sensations is one thing, I understand that… but the rest I don’t get.
Ok elfbabe that’s it. Mom’s picking you up and bringing you home TODAY!
dadgop
For me, it’s not the kill, it’s the thrill of the chase.
These things would be about as fun as shooting fish in a barrel.