Combination

General chat about fembots, technosexual culture or any other ASFR related topics that do not fit into the other categories below.
Post Reply
User avatar
xodar
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: South Texas
x 1
Contact:

Combination

Post by xodar » Sat Nov 10, 2007 2:57 pm

Since I have mentioned wanting a fembot to feel warm and to smell real and give off pheromones, I wonder to what extent it would be ethical to incorporate living material into a bot.

That is, the frame and much of the innards, including the personality would be pure robotics: metal, plastic, printed circuitry (or whatever advance beyond that there will be), but some muscles, the skin and hair and maybe other appliances (boobs, and such) would actually be living matter.

I suppose those parts could be cloned from persons willing to sell their DNA. Don't know. I'm looking into future technology, but you could imagine, for example, that if you like Marilyn Monroe and there's any viable DNA her estate might sell it and you'd actually have her real skin and hair and eyes regrown in your bot. Sounds a bit ghoulish, but it would actually be her -- to an extent.

Aside from this meaning the bot would not only have to breathe but eat and drink to maintain a valid biology, where would you draw the line between a machine and a living being? Since it's only some skin and sense organs and sweat glands and the like it really wouldn't be more alive than a sea anemone or a clam and behavior along with the semblance of consciousness would reside in obviously artificial circuitry. Would having to shut it down be murder? Dogs are more cognizant and "human" and you often have to have them euthanized.

Would the fact that it was identical to a famous person (or a twin of your first girlfriend) make it valuable? Maybe people would steal the DNA and make their own, ripping off the estate (or you) of legitimate profits...

Is this going to be done, ever?
Would you want to do it?
"You can believe me, because I never lie and I'm always right." -- George Leroy Tirebiter.
If a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to hear it I don't give a rat's ass.
http://www.bbotw.com/product.aspx?ISBN=0-7414-4384-8
http://www.bbotw.com/description.asp?ISBN=0-7414-2058-9

User avatar
noidguy
Retired staff member
Posts: 1257
Joined: Fri May 24, 2002 6:32 pm
Location: Michigan
x 5
Contact:

Post by noidguy » Sat Nov 10, 2007 5:06 pm

Kishin wrote:This was sort of explored in an old TV show (the name escapes me right now) where they made cloned humans and replaced the brains with programmable computers, then sold them as "dolls" effectively.
Welcome to Paradox - "Acute Triangle" with Monika Schnarre

User avatar
xodar
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: South Texas
x 1
Contact:

Post by xodar » Sun Nov 11, 2007 8:06 am

Kishin wrote:That whole idea makes me ill.

This was sort of explored inan old TV show (the name escapes me right now) where they made cloned humans and replaced the brains with programmable computers, then sold them as "dolls" effectively.

Cyborgs just never have sat well with me. I mean I suppose someone like Kusanagi from GITS would be okay since she's pretty much a brain in a can, and the whole chassis is a machine.

But the whole integration of human bits into mechanical ones just seems a little wigged out and uncomfortable to me.

Yes, it seemed a bit ghoulish, as I said. I would imagine this will be a prohibited technology if it becomes possible and beforehand just in case.

I wonder where the line will be drawn between a "bionic" human and a biologically enhanced robot...
It looks like it would be a naturally grown human who has an accident and is restored or has some job that requires enhancements or who wants them just like piercings vs a robot that has cloned tissue added to it.

Maybe we'll see.
"You can believe me, because I never lie and I'm always right." -- George Leroy Tirebiter.
If a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to hear it I don't give a rat's ass.
http://www.bbotw.com/product.aspx?ISBN=0-7414-4384-8
http://www.bbotw.com/description.asp?ISBN=0-7414-2058-9

User avatar
ASFRyan
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 2:31 pm
Technosexuality: Transformation
Identification: Cyborg
Gender: Male
Location: Old Detroit
Contact:

Post by ASFRyan » Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:13 pm

I'm into the cyborg thang.

There's actually a wide legal and ethical range of opinions based on US law and popular opinion on the "sacredness" of human tissue.

The more liberal viewpoint is that flesh is flesh. You don't go mourning for skin flakes and fingernail clippings that get flushed down the drain since they are not essential to existence and are a natural waste product despite at one point being part of "us."

Even things with the potential to be one of "us" -- stem cells and embryos are fair game for implantation into other humans and scientific use. By that line of thinking I don't think you're that big of a slippery slope to imagine that use of those tissues for synthesizing a cyborg that in no way involves human tissue... although in terms of forseeable science, you'll probably need some sort of human gray matter to keep those human parts alive.

And keep in mind that the conservative element of society won't want anything even remotely close to that occurring.
"I never knew anyone who wanted to be a robot."

User avatar
xodar
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: South Texas
x 1
Contact:

Post by xodar » Sun Nov 11, 2007 1:30 pm

Not necessarily. I'm actually pretty conservative but I am not altogether opposed to this. Besides, I'd get a blood transfusion, or an organ transplant from a corpse if I needed it. Millions have. What about the people who have transplanted hands and faces?

It would still be a bit creepy to have a semi-robotic twin, even with your permission to use donated or sold tissue, if you happened to see it. Or would it be similar to seeing an old girlfriend getting married? But what about a semiliving version of someone you know is dead?

But as I see it, this is possible a shortcut to getting through the "uncanny valley" that your sense of smell and perceptions of movement and detail would be in however realistic a bot's visual appearance. Actually duplicating the production of chemicals or their facsimilies and other effects that we aren't even conscious of by mechanical and electronic means would be incredibly complicated. Probably could be done, but this is a shortcut.

I was thinking of the possibility of cloning meat for food instead of slaughtering whole animals. Is it so different?
People will decide when the time comes and if they decide against it it will be done anyhow for the very wealthy.

(Earlier when I replied I'd forgotten about the now accepted ghoulish factor of living on organs from people killed in accidents. Happens all the time now.)
Last edited by xodar on Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"You can believe me, because I never lie and I'm always right." -- George Leroy Tirebiter.
If a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to hear it I don't give a rat's ass.
http://www.bbotw.com/product.aspx?ISBN=0-7414-4384-8
http://www.bbotw.com/description.asp?ISBN=0-7414-2058-9

User avatar
DJDojo
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2007 6:43 pm
Location: My warm den...
Contact:

Post by DJDojo » Mon Nov 12, 2007 9:49 am

Actually, when I was on a Star Wars forum one of my characters was a female cyborg...she underwent the procedure to become one willingly, but just looking at what I put I wouldn't recommend it for anyone, even if the proper technology was available.

And what if, after the procedure, the flesh "rejects" the mechanical attachments (in the same sense as a failed organ donation)? Or the new "cyborg" has an adverse reaction to the mechanical parts/flesh and they experience mental trauma as a "side effect?" Quite frankly, those are risks I'd rather not take.

Either you have a real person...or you have a robot with a human appearance. It would be madness to combine the two.

User avatar
xodar
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: South Texas
x 1
Contact:

Post by xodar » Mon Nov 12, 2007 12:48 pm

DJDojo wrote:.........

And what if, after the procedure, the flesh "rejects" the mechanical attachments (in the same sense as a failed organ donation)? Or the new "cyborg" has an adverse reaction to the mechanical parts/flesh and they experience mental trauma as a "side effect?" Quite frankly, those are risks I'd rather not take.

Either you have a real person...or you have a robot with a human appearance. It would be madness to combine the two.
Good thoughts, but isn't an amputee with an artificial limb or someone even temporarily on life support or dialysis already partly there? The pirate with the hook or peg leg? Dental fillings, crowns; glasses and contact lenses...
Not new: apparently people in Roman times and before had dental prosthesis as well as wooden and metal limbs.
Isn't this just extending the old dream of repairing the body...

One thing that probably upsets people besides the creep factor of an unconscious but living partial version of someone either alive or dead is that it's a sort of slavery even if the human part is not conscious.
I begin to see that as the real issue.

But in essence it would be the result of some action like selling your hair or your grandmother's hair as far as you would be concerned. So your grandmother was Jean Harlow and you sold the rights to regrow her boobs on an aluminum frame....
"You can believe me, because I never lie and I'm always right." -- George Leroy Tirebiter.
If a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to hear it I don't give a rat's ass.
http://www.bbotw.com/product.aspx?ISBN=0-7414-4384-8
http://www.bbotw.com/description.asp?ISBN=0-7414-2058-9

User avatar
xodar
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: South Texas
x 1
Contact:

Post by xodar » Tue Nov 13, 2007 6:05 am

This is another technology that will open up another can of worms.
I don't know what will be the outcome and probably won't be around when it develops or if I am probably won't have the money to deal with it.

The idea is that I would want her to be able to sweat and give off some natural chemicals. I am not sexually aroused by the smell of a new car's seat covers. Or an old car's. I suspect your sublimenal senses like smell and those of which you are unconscious (I forget the name, but the organ behind your nose that picks up pheromones) would have their uncanny valley without this.

Maybe such constructions will be regarded somewhat as pets. I do not mistreat animals and unless they are suffering I keep them till they die of old age. This type of cyborg android would be no more cognizant than a snail.

It also occurred to me that since she has to eat, maybe she could be designed to eat kitchen garbage.

It's something to ponder, anyhow. It could happen.
"You can believe me, because I never lie and I'm always right." -- George Leroy Tirebiter.
If a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to hear it I don't give a rat's ass.
http://www.bbotw.com/product.aspx?ISBN=0-7414-4384-8
http://www.bbotw.com/description.asp?ISBN=0-7414-2058-9

User avatar
visceralpsyche
Posts: 120
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2006 4:20 am
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Contact:

Post by visceralpsyche » Tue Nov 13, 2007 7:40 am

xodar wrote:It also occurred to me that since she has to eat, maybe she could be designed to eat kitchen garbage.
Not sure I'd want to kiss her straight afterwards :lol:

Since the uncanny valley has been raised here, I thought I might give you all a look at my thesis paper for "Birth" which was based around that exact theory.

If you haven't watched "Birth" yet you might want to do so before reading the paper (download it from my website in the sig below), as the paper goes into some depth and may spoil some of the movie for you if you haven't already seen it.

Anyway, here's the direct PDF link:

http://www.visceralpsyche.com/downloads ... eeming.pdf

Hope you get some enjoyment out of reading it!

Cheers,

Paul

User avatar
xodar
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: South Texas
x 1
Contact:

Post by xodar » Tue Nov 13, 2007 1:17 pm

Interesting you discussed the AI movie, which I never saw, in your essay. When I saw the title in your forum entry I thought of another movie called Birth in which Nicole Kidman plays a widow in her 30s who meets a boy aged 10 who has her dead husband's memories. Not exactly an "uncanny valley" situation, more just a spooky, if not totally infrequently depicted, one.

I was also reminded of a theme in Asian and N. American mythology, "The Animal Wife", in which a man marries a girl who later proves to be a fox or some other creature when he realizes how strange she actually is. Elizabeth Marshall Thomas wrote a novel of that title set in the Ice Age putting it in a human perspective.

A very old theme, it seems.

My idea is simply that if we don't have fembots that smell like flesh and give off pheromones they will inhabit that disturbing vale no matter how realistic they look and sound, or how realistically they move. I notice this, perhaps, because I seem to have had a better sense of smell than average (though it has declined along with hearing and eyesight with age).
That we aren't conscious of much of this dimension makes no difference. It affects us, as in synchronizing women's periods in dorms and convents. Who knows how else?

It occurred to me that the fembot could eat garbage because that would be energy efficient. Why shouldn't she serve several functions?
"You can believe me, because I never lie and I'm always right." -- George Leroy Tirebiter.
If a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to hear it I don't give a rat's ass.
http://www.bbotw.com/product.aspx?ISBN=0-7414-4384-8
http://www.bbotw.com/description.asp?ISBN=0-7414-2058-9

User avatar
keraptis
Posts: 790
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2002 5:02 am
Technosexuality: Transformation
Identification: Human
Gender: Male
Location: Northeast U.S.
Contact:

Post by keraptis » Tue Nov 13, 2007 10:58 pm

xodar wrote: It occurred to me that the fembot could eat garbage because that would be energy efficient. Why shouldn't she serve several functions?
Isn't the whole point of ASFR that it's a sexual fantasy? I have a hard time seeing how ideas like this fit with that basic premise.

I'm sure it would be much more "efficient" if real-life girls didn't waste so much water taking showers. Doesn't mean I'd want to go anywhere near them.

User avatar
xodar
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: South Texas
x 1
Contact:

Post by xodar » Wed Nov 14, 2007 1:40 pm

keraptis wrote:
xodar wrote: It occurred to me that the fembot could eat garbage because that would be energy efficient. Why shouldn't she serve several functions?
Isn't the whole point of ASFR that it's a sexual fantasy? I have a hard time seeing how ideas like this fit with that basic premise.

I'm sure it would be much more "efficient" if real-life girls didn't waste so much water taking showers. Doesn't mean I'd want to go anywhere near them.
Yes, that's true. I guess I'm trying to justify it by making her "energy efficient".
"You can believe me, because I never lie and I'm always right." -- George Leroy Tirebiter.
If a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to hear it I don't give a rat's ass.
http://www.bbotw.com/product.aspx?ISBN=0-7414-4384-8
http://www.bbotw.com/description.asp?ISBN=0-7414-2058-9

User avatar
A.N.N.
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 4:24 pm
Technosexuality: Built and Transformation
Identification: Human
Gender: Male
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by A.N.N. » Wed Nov 14, 2007 3:51 pm

I have to agree with Kishin on this one (especially about Maj Kusanagi, she's hot :D ).

To me a cyborg is alright, but if you're missing the brain (what I consider to be the soul of the human), then you're using an organic machine, which is like the inverse of what I like in ASFR. I want the machine to be a "traditional" machine, and if anything is organic, it needs to be at a minimum, the "soul". Whether that's through good programming or a real brain. You can add other organic parts but (1) it will only dilute the fantasy [akin to what keraptis said] and (2) You must have at least a real brain. People might put down fake breasts in public, but I honestly wouldn't ever mind a nice firm (but not hard) set of plastic breasts.

This is totally just my opinion, and I don't know if everyone (or anyone!) shares it with me.
A.N.N.

User avatar
xodar
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: South Texas
x 1
Contact:

Post by xodar » Wed Nov 14, 2007 5:45 pm

I see the difference here.

This isn't something I have fantasized about, but something I consider a practical matter even if it will not be highly developed in my lifetime.

I am considering fembots as substitutes for biological women and thus want them to be as real as possible.

In other words, robots to me have always been tools and not objects of sexual fantasy or interest. It's real women I'm "fixated" on. I am simply not interested in all the difficulties that come with relationships; some people enjoy that but to me it is simply a waste of time. You could be having fun instead of constantly worrying about whether the other person "really" likes you and all that stuff.

This doesn't mean I'm not also now interested in robots and dolls as art and technical achievements.

Two different but converging approaches.
"You can believe me, because I never lie and I'm always right." -- George Leroy Tirebiter.
If a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to hear it I don't give a rat's ass.
http://www.bbotw.com/product.aspx?ISBN=0-7414-4384-8
http://www.bbotw.com/description.asp?ISBN=0-7414-2058-9

User avatar
keraptis
Posts: 790
Joined: Sun Jun 30, 2002 5:02 am
Technosexuality: Transformation
Identification: Human
Gender: Male
Location: Northeast U.S.
Contact:

Post by keraptis » Thu Nov 15, 2007 10:57 am

xodar wrote:I see the difference here.

This isn't something I have fantasized about, but something I consider a practical matter even if it will not be highly developed in my lifetime.

I am considering fembots as substitutes for biological women and thus want them to be as real as possible.

In other words, robots to me have always been tools and not objects of sexual fantasy or interest. It's real women I'm "fixated" on. I am simply not interested in all the difficulties that come with relationships; some people enjoy that but to me it is simply a waste of time. You could be having fun instead of constantly worrying about whether the other person "really" likes you and all that stuff.

This doesn't mean I'm not also now interested in robots and dolls as art and technical achievements.

Two different but converging approaches.
That's fair, and I appreciate your honesty ... but I think that's why I'm not connecting with the ideas you've posted in this and several other threads I've seen in the past. The worldview you describe strikes me as sociopathic.

User avatar
xodar
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: South Texas
x 1
Contact:

Post by xodar » Thu Nov 15, 2007 1:12 pm

keraptis wrote:That's fair, and I appreciate your honesty ... but I think that's why I'm not connecting with the ideas you've posted in this and several other threads I've seen in the past. The worldview you describe strikes me as sociopathic.
Interesting, again. I see my outlook as constructive in that I don't want to waste time on a lot of stuff that is essentially nonproductive and distracting, and defensive in that I don't want to take unnecessary risks.

Artificial women will be cooperative and helpful and not require constrant struggles to maintain one's integrity. Thus the relationship can go forward and be constructive, with each developing their respective talents without fighting to control the other.
Alas, the fembot will have few talents since she will be a machine even if she incorporates biological material, but there will be no debilitating and distracting struggles.

Ihe same could be said for male androids for women or gay men.
"You can believe me, because I never lie and I'm always right." -- George Leroy Tirebiter.
If a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to hear it I don't give a rat's ass.
http://www.bbotw.com/product.aspx?ISBN=0-7414-4384-8
http://www.bbotw.com/description.asp?ISBN=0-7414-2058-9

User avatar
WinterRose
Posts: 283
Joined: Sun May 26, 2002 5:29 am
Technosexuality: Built and Transformation
Identification: Android
Gender: Female
Location: Raleigh NC
x 1
x 1
Contact:

Post by WinterRose » Mon Nov 26, 2007 12:16 pm

Cyborgs. Yuck. You got your meaty bits in my Robot! You got your machinery in my meatbag! Two bad ideas that go worse together.

Why put dying organic matter in a pecisely engineered entity?
Image

User avatar
xodar
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: South Texas
x 1
Contact:

Post by xodar » Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:35 pm

WinterRose wrote:Cyborgs. Yuck. You got your meaty bits in my Robot! You got your machinery in my meatbag! Two bad ideas that go worse together.

Why put dying organic matter in a pecisely engineered entity?
That's a good point.
I'm after having her smell and taste and everywhere feel like a biological female and this seems overall a simpler and more efficient way of doing it than making all the relevant factors artificially.
I've made out with girls on car seats, but I'm not going to be turned on much by one that actually smells like seat covers.

Possibly bioscience will be sufficiently developed to overcome aging, first in cultured tissue and then in "natural" tissue.
Not while I'm alive, though.
"You can believe me, because I never lie and I'm always right." -- George Leroy Tirebiter.
If a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to hear it I don't give a rat's ass.
http://www.bbotw.com/product.aspx?ISBN=0-7414-4384-8
http://www.bbotw.com/description.asp?ISBN=0-7414-2058-9

User avatar
xodar
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: South Texas
x 1
Contact:

Post by xodar » Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:17 am

Scientist: 'Hybrid' computers will meld living brains with technology
Sounds sci-fi, but researcher says hybrids using living brains will be in autos, desktops in 10-15 years

Sharon Gaudin


December 03, 2007 (Computerworld) -- A scientist who successfully connected a moth's brain to a robot predicts that in 10 to 15 years we'll be using "hybrid" computers running a combination of technology and living organic tissue.

Charles Higgins, an associate professor at the University of Arizona, has built a robot that is guided by the brain and eyes of a moth. Higgins told Computerworld that he basically straps a hawk moth to the robot and then puts electrodes in neurons that deal with sight in the moth's brain. Then the robot responds to what the moth is seeing -- when something approaches the moth, the robot moves out of the way.

Higgins explained that he had been trying to build a computer chip that would do what brains do when processing visual images. He found that a chip that can function nearly like the human brain would cost about $60,000.

"At that price, I thought I was getting lower quality than if I was just accessing the brain of an insect which costs, well, considerably less," he said. "If you have a living system, it has sensory systems that are far beyond what we can build. It's doable, but we're having to push the limits of current technology to do it."

This organically guided, 12-in.-tall robot on wheels may be pushing the technology envelope right now, but it's just the seed of what is coming in terms of combining living tissue with computer components, according to Higgins.

"In future decades, this will be not surprising," he said. "Most computers will have some kind of living component to them. In time, our knowledge of biology will get to a point where if your heart is failing, we won't wait for a donor. We'll just grow you one. We'll be able to do that with brains, too. If I could grow brains, I could really make computing efficient."

While the moth is physically attached to the robot at this point, Higgins said he expects that one day only the brain itself will be needed. "Can we grow a brain that does what we want it to do? Can I grow an eye with a brain connected to it and have it do what I need it to do? Can I engineer an organism and hook it into my artificial system?" he asked. "Yes, I really think this is coming. There are things biology can do so much better. Think of a computer that can be both living and nonliving. We'd be growing tissue that has no more intelligence than a liver or a heart. I don't see ethical issues here."

He does see an ethical line, though. "Our goal is not to hook up primate brains to a robot," said Higgins. "There's the possibility, when you start to tap into brains, for all sorts of evil applications. There are certainly all these ethical issues when you start talking about human and primate brains."

Higgins said he expects that these future hybrid systems will take the form of a visual sensor that sits on the front of an automobile and keeps the vehicle from rear-ending another car. He also envisions them being embedded in military robots that can go into a hot zone, see the enemy and actually sniff out land mines. And hybrid systems could be used to make people with spinal cord injuries mobile again.

Will future desktops and laptops have organic parts?

Why not, said Higgins. "Computers now are good at chess and Word and Excel, but they're not good at being flexible or interacting with other users," he added. "There may be some way to use biological computing to actually make our computers seem more intelligent."

Right now, Higgins has successfully attached electrodes into a single vision neuron in the moth's brain. (Different neurons perform different functions like vision and the sense of smell. Humans have millions, if not trillions, of neurons. Insects have hundreds.) Now, Higgins is experimenting with connecting four electrodes into neurons on both sides of the moth's brain, expanding the visual image that the robot receives. "That should give me information about things moving on the left and right of the animal, at different speeds and moving up and down," he explained.

Higgins is also experimenting with tapping into the moth's muscles and olfactory senses. If he can work with the muscles, for instance, a strapped down moth trying to move in a certain direction would actually propel the robot.

"We're developing a lot of technology that could be used for prosthetic applications," said the researcher. "There are lots of people working on connecting functional brains to people who have nonworking limbs. You connect to the brain and send the information to a human limb or robotic limb. It's an area that is closely related to what we're doing."


http://www.computerworld.com/action/art ... _AM&nlid=1

8)
"You can believe me, because I never lie and I'm always right." -- George Leroy Tirebiter.
If a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to hear it I don't give a rat's ass.
http://www.bbotw.com/product.aspx?ISBN=0-7414-4384-8
http://www.bbotw.com/description.asp?ISBN=0-7414-2058-9

User avatar
A.N.N.
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 4:24 pm
Technosexuality: Built and Transformation
Identification: Human
Gender: Male
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by A.N.N. » Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:07 pm

Given the complexity of creating any kind of serious AI, and given the constant interface challenges, I believe we are more likely going to encounter the hybrid scenario well before anything like the gynoids we dream of become feasible. In other words, I thing the "Ghost in the Shell" world is far more likely and just around the corner than the "A.I." world.

There is a lot of neuro-research using simple Aplysia brains to rat brains to control machinery, even a jet fighter! And there's a lot of government money going into medical research for prosthetics right now. Generally speaking, where the big government research $ goes, so goes our overall technology. Lots of money in these. No money into pure AI, at least in the US.

Just my opinion, mixed with what I see and hear about in the lab where I work. But I really wish we did have human-like fembots :cry:
A.N.N.

User avatar
xodar
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: South Texas
x 1
Contact:

Post by xodar » Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:25 pm

A.N.N. wrote:Given the complexity of creating any kind of serious AI, and given the constant interface challenges, I believe we are more likely going to encounter the hybrid scenario well before anything like the gynoids we dream of become feasible. In other words, I thing the "Ghost in the Shell" world is far more likely and just around the corner than the "A.I." world.

There is a lot of neuro-research using simple Aplysia brains to rat brains to control machinery, even a jet fighter! And there's a lot of government money going into medical research for prosthetics right now. Generally speaking, where the big government research $ goes, so goes our overall technology. Lots of money in these. No money into pure AI, at least in the US.

Just my opinion, mixed with what I see and hear about in the lab where I work. But I really wish we did have human-like fembots :cry:
You're probably right.
The "practical" applications will probably be here before the "desirable" ones.
I confess, I sometimes wonder what kind of awareness the biological components might have (and how they are nourished). I don't think computers have any awareness so that doesn't bother me.
"You can believe me, because I never lie and I'm always right." -- George Leroy Tirebiter.
If a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to hear it I don't give a rat's ass.
http://www.bbotw.com/product.aspx?ISBN=0-7414-4384-8
http://www.bbotw.com/description.asp?ISBN=0-7414-2058-9

Steamboy
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 12:25 pm
Technosexuality: Transformation
Identification: Human
Gender: Male
Contact:

Post by Steamboy » Wed Dec 05, 2007 4:54 pm

That sounds really nice, but in order to maintain alive the brain, a life support device will be needed, some kind of synthetic blood and energy transform system, the chip will need to eat, and organic matter tends to die if its not fed. Just imagine going to repair your mobile phone because you didn't fed it with sugar.

User avatar
xodar
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: South Texas
x 1
Contact:

Post by xodar » Wed Dec 05, 2007 6:27 pm

Dr. Amens wrote:That sounds really nice, but in order to maintain alive the brain, a life support device will be needed, some kind of synthetic blood and energy transform system, the chip will need to eat, and organic matter tends to die if its not fed. Just imagine going to repair your mobile phone because you didn't fed it with sugar.
Yes, that's where it gets messy. I admit synthetics are clean, or can be.
"You can believe me, because I never lie and I'm always right." -- George Leroy Tirebiter.
If a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to hear it I don't give a rat's ass.
http://www.bbotw.com/product.aspx?ISBN=0-7414-4384-8
http://www.bbotw.com/description.asp?ISBN=0-7414-2058-9

User avatar
A.N.N.
Posts: 356
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 4:24 pm
Technosexuality: Built and Transformation
Identification: Human
Gender: Male
Location: USA
Contact:

Post by A.N.N. » Tue Dec 11, 2007 6:19 pm

Although the research is in connecting rats to fighter jets, that's not the goal. The expected result is (1) to replace limbs that have been lost with synthetic ones (competing with stem cell research to just grow it back) and (2) to enhance the human capability with electronic add-ons (probably to the brain).

So rather than make our cell phones smarter with a goopy brain, we make our bodies have cell phone capability, i.e. direct connect the cell phone to our brain. This way the cell phone could be a normal synthetic addition or a goopy thing that can mesh organically. Like I said, lots of different efforts, and not well coordinated since it's in what we call "basic research" mode (like exploration) and not application or production yet.

Ideally (for us anyway) during this exploration of human (and other animal) brains we may find ways to mimic some of its behavior that can lead to decent AI (in a more traditional, electronic sense). One can hope.
A.N.N.

User avatar
xodar
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 1:53 pm
Location: South Texas
x 1
Contact:

Post by xodar » Tue Dec 11, 2007 6:48 pm

There's no way I want a cell phone connection inside my brain. I still don't own one though I may get one in a year or so.

It would be nice to integrate a printed circuit that contains en entire language, which you could then begin speaking almost immediately.

This kind of reminds me of something I hadn't thought about in a long time, speaking of animal brains guiding machines. In the 40s and 50s pigeons were taught to peck at pictures of objects and to peck more strongly as the object appeared to grow.
Actually, the pigeons were inside missles and trained to peck a TV screen showing a target building. The peck helped steer the missles into the building.
It was one of the first applications of Skinner's operant conditioning.
Then transistors were invented.
"You can believe me, because I never lie and I'm always right." -- George Leroy Tirebiter.
If a tree falls in the forest and there's nobody there to hear it I don't give a rat's ass.
http://www.bbotw.com/product.aspx?ISBN=0-7414-4384-8
http://www.bbotw.com/description.asp?ISBN=0-7414-2058-9

Post Reply
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 20 guests