TrueCompanion: The first-ever sex robot?

[Gorgo]

Holy fuck, that thing gets uglier every time I see it.

Agreed.

[Keizo]

NO, NO, NO!!! Please stop giving this any press! It makes all of us look bad. All non fembot fetishists will look at this and associate it with us and it doesn't represent us at all. It doesn't even compare to a realdoll in looks and makes us all look like desperate losers. Aiko can see and move and do so much more and her responses aren't pre-recorded. The Actroid has more pre-recorded responses than this thing and can actually move! Make it stop

[mysticblueca]

ARGH! The Nightmares have returned! Get it out of my head, get it out!!!!!

I'm with Keizo let it DIE!! Hopefully it will go away.

[Stephaniebot]

I'm guessing the guy who made this monstrosity is sexually attracted to retarded men... because that "doll" looks like a retarded man.

Have you never seen Catherine Tate on the TV at all, because she looks exactly like her!

[DukeNukem 2417]

Someone should take that ugly-ass thing behind a building and put it out of its misery. Any volunteers?

[fnord]

I have to agree Stephaniebot it dose have a very distinct resemblance to Tate.

I guess too much Brit tv over the years here...lol

Have you never seen Catherine Tate on the TV at all, because she looks exactly like her!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catherine_Tate

I believe the issue Tate is 41-42 now.

May be he's a closet Dr Who fan...I'm hoping for a Billy Piper ...lol

[PsychoKirby]

NO, NO, NO!!! Please stop giving this any press! It makes all of us look bad. All non fembot fetishists will look at this and associate it with us and it doesn't represent us at all. It doesn't even compare to a realdoll in looks and makes us all look like desperate losers. Aiko can see and move and do so much more and her responses aren't pre-recorded. The Actroid has more pre-recorded responses than this thing and can actually move! Make it stop

I've got to agree here. If you look at the comments for any news article or video on the TrueCompanion, you'll see plenty of insults towards ASFRians. To be fair, these sort of comments, cruel as they are, show up anytime "normal" people discuss ASFR, but since here the robot in question is one most of us wouldn't even want it's even more unfair.

[davidlevylondon@yahoo.com]

Roxy the "Sex Robot" - Real or Fake?
------------------------------------------


By David Levy


Late last year publicity started appearing in the media about a “sex robot” developed by a New Jersey entrepreneur, Douglas Hines. A web site www.truecompanion.com proudly proclaimed that

“We have been designing “Roxxxy TrueCompanion”, your TrueCompanion.com sex robot, for many years, making sure that she: knows your name, your likes and dislikes, can carry on a discussion and expresses her love to you and be your loving friend. She can talk to you, listen to you and feel your touch. She can even have an orgasm!”

Other amazing claims on the truecompanion.com site include:
“She also has a personality which is matched exactly as much as possible to your personality. So she likes what you like, dislikes what you dislike, etc. She also has moods during the day just like real people! She can be sleepy, conversational or she can “be in the mood”!

and

“Roxxxy also has a heartbeat and a circulatory system! The circulatory system helps heat the inside of her body.”

and

“She can talk to you about soccer, about your stocks in the stock market, etc.”

and

“We have been working on Roxxxy since 2001. The first few years were focused mainly on the artificial intelligence portion of Roxxxy TrueCompanion. Roxxxy is the 9th version of our sex robot. Our first sex robot, Trudy, was built in the 1990’s and was not designed for resale. Rather, she was a test bed to refine techniques which we would later use in Roxxxy and Rocky TrueCompanion.”

For millions of men eagerly awaiting the next major technological development that would enhance their sex lives, the announcements about Roxxxy probably seemed almost too good to be true. But the press launch of Roxxxy that took place at the Adult Entertainment Expo in Las Vegas on January 9th posed more questions than it answered.

Before examining some of these questions I should first state my credentials for instigating this investigation. I have been researching the subject of sex with robots in a serious academic manner since 2003. I did a rather thorough job of examining the relevant literature, for my book ‘Love + Sex With Robots’ and for my PhD thesis ‘Intimate Relationships with Artificial Partners’. During the course of that research I unearthed some 450 relevant publications from the fields of psychology, sexology, robotics, artificial intelligence, and others, ranging from academic papers to articles in the popular media. These publications are all mentioned in the bibliography to my thesis. I also exchanged emails, over a period of more than three years, with many experts in these fields. Not once did I come across the name Douglas Hines or any mention of his project. Nowhere on the Internet can one find a mention (prior to late 2009) of a sex robot developed in New Jersey (where Hines is based) or a mention of what he claims is an earlier sex robot developed by him - “Trudy”. How come?

Furthermore, I am acquainted with many prominent experts in the fields of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics, most of whom are based in North America, and not one of them has ever mentioned Douglas Hines or his project to me. Why?

Another thing that has surprised me was that, until I read about Douglas Hines and sought him out, he had not contacted me, even though my book has been extensively publicized on the Internet and via more than 120 radio, TV, newspaper and magazine interviews in the USA, and I am rather easy to find with a few minutes help from Google. Perhaps I am being immodest in claiming to be the world’s leading expert on this subject, but so far as I know no-one else has given lectures on the subject at academic conferences, and no-one else has written a comprehensive book on the subject or made it the topic for a Masters degree or PhD, so would it not be logical and sensible for anyone developing a sex robot to make contact with me in the hope of learning something useful? When Hines was asked by a journalist, in December, if he had contacted me, his reply was that he hadn’t been able to locate me. How come?

My suspicions have been further aroused by the implications of the claims Hines has been making for Roxxxy’s technical capabilities. If Roxxy can do everything alluded to on the truecompanion.com web site then Hines’s technical achievements would appear to have surpassed those of MIT, Stanford University, Carnegie Mellon and all of the world’s other leading research establishments in fields as diverse as speech recognition (“She hears what you are saying”), human-computer conversation (“Have a Conversation or Sex — It is Up to You!”), artificial emotion and personality (Roxxxy is claimed to provide its owners “with companionship and unconditional love”), and other research areas within the fields of artificial intelligence and robotics. How come Hines has achieved so much in the world of artificial intelligence without having had, so far as one can tell, so much as a single paper published on the subject?

And is it reasonable to believe that Douglas Hines could really have achieved all this? In my opinion it is not, despite his claim that “I was with Bell Labs Artificial Intelligence”.

In December the truecompanion.com web site announced that Roxxxy would be launched at a press conference on January 9th at the 2010 Adult Entertainment Expo in Las Vegas. The Las Vegas demonstration can be viewed on You-Tube at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r0eRQ_0C-I
where it appears that touching Roxxxy’s hand causes it to exclaim that it “likes holding hands with you”, but what does that prove? Only that an electronic sensor is linked to some sort of recorded sound output. It is not a demonstration of the speech technology that would be needed in a talking conversational robot. And furthermore, the You-Tube video and Hines’s behaviour during the demonstration prompts the question — how much of the technology was inside Roxxxy and how much in the computer or whatever electronics there were located behind the prototype?

Another surprising element of Hines’s publicity is the statement that Roxxy cost between $500,000 and $1 million to develop. I have been in the business of developing consumer electronic products for the past 30 years or so, and have spend a considerable amount of time and money in the development of leading edge human-computer conversation software (which is just one part of the jigsaw of technologies needed to produce a Roxxxy), and I simply cannot understand how Hines managed to keep the development costs of Roxxxy so low. How did he do it for so little? After all, a product such as is described on his web site would be a huge and very expensive development task, especially in view of all the high level expertise that would be needed and which Hines claims to have employed on his project:

“True Companion has pulled talent from organizations in the US focused on movie productions, military products as well as people from the leading artificial intelligence and animatronic institutions . . .”

And while we are on the subject of costs, how is it that Roxxxy, with all of its “capabilities”, is advertised at $6,500, when a non-sex robot (with very few degrees of freedom) from leading American robotics company, Hanson Robotics, costs $50,000 and up? How can Hines offer so much more for so much less?

Now let me comment on a little “due diligence” checking that anyone can carry out on Douglas Hines and his business, courtesy of Google.
The business is based in Lincoln Park, New Jersey, at the same address as another Hines business — Data Software Solutions LLC
( http://www.datasoftwaresolutions.com/ ). Looking at the web site of Data Software Solutions gives a good impression at first — it is a professionally designed site and gives all the appearances of being the site of a company with substance. The company claims to be run by “World class professionals committed to providing your solution on time and within budget”, and there are pages within the site devoted to the company’s claimed activities in accounting, field staff automation, reporting, e-commerce and other business areas. Yet despite having studied these pages somewhat carefully I simply cannot understand exactly what it is that Data Software Solutions does, and the site raises some rather obvious questions: Who are the clients of Data Software Solutions? What projects has the company carried out? And why is it, despite claims on the web site that Data Software Solutions has offices in New York, California and Bangalore, that Google was unable to help me find nothing about any of those offices, and a check through the telephone directories for all three locations fails to find any mention of them?

Isn’t this all rather suspicious?

Hines’s launch in Las Vegas has attracted quite a lot of media attention and, presumably, the attention of many prospective customers for Roxxxy’s supposedly seductive charms. And at the beginning of this month (February 2010) Hines’s web site started to take orders for Roxxxy, advertising the product at a “sale price” of $6,495, which it claims represents a reduction of $500. Accompanying the invitation to place an order, the site also presents a “Master Agreement” that extends to 15 clauses of legalese, covering the purchase of Roxxxy and subscriptions to associated services. When I last checked this part of the site (on February 6th), the “Contents list” at the head of the Master Agreement omitted any mention of the “RETURNS, REFUNDS AND CANCELLATION POLICY” (clause 12.1), which makes it clear that once production commences the purchaser can not get any of his money refunded. This begs the question - why would any customer be willing to part with their money without any possibility of recovery, when there has been no public demonstration or independent product review of a fully working Roxxxy that can perform as advertised?

Since the truecompanion.com site started taking orders for Roxxxy, various news sites have been issuing comments such as
“Roxxxy won't be available for delivery for several months, but Hines is taking pre-orders through his Web site, TrueCompanion.com, where thousands of men have signed up.”

If there have indeed been thousands of men so far ordering Roxxxy, what does this mean for Douglas Hines and his business? Answer - sixes of millions of dollars, all for a product the advertised capabilities of which have yet to be demonstrated to the buying public. And with availability being several months away, if it turns out that Hines cannot deliver what he promises he will meanwhile have accrued payments for several months worth of orders before the first thousands of unlucky customers discover that they have wasted their money.

So to anyone who is thinking of ordering a Roxxxy I would respectfully suggest this. First ask Douglas Hines to permit you to visit his office at 7 Mason Avenue, Lincoln Park NJ, or if you live too far away to want to travel to Lincoln Park then find a friend or relative who is near enough. Whoever visits should ask to see a proper demonstration of the conversational and other skills that are so enthusiastically proclaimed on the truecompanion.com web site. But you do not believe it is necessary to arrange such a visit, if you have complete faith in the advertised claims for Roxxxy, please let me know. I own a very nice bridge in Brooklyn that I’d like to sell you.

[DukeNukem 2417]

Finally, somone willing to investigate this TrueCompanion stuff with a new outlook! David, I tip my hat to you.

[PsychoKirby]

Are you really the David Levy? I loved your book.

Anyway, thank you so much for the information. TrueCompanion seemed disappointing enough as it is, but the fact that it could very well be a scam is just downright insulting. Mr. Hines has a lot of explaining to do.

[davidlevylondon@yahoo.com]

At first I thought that the most likely explanation for Hines's hype was that he was hoping to attract finance from venture capitalists and the like, in order that he could try to create what he claims to have already created. But when I saw that his web site was actually taking orders at $6,450 a throw, and that customers can not get back any of their money once "production" of their Roxxxy has commenced, the alarm bells started to ring out very loudly.

If this is not an attempted fraud, why is the web site offering to sell something that does not exist as it is described on the site? But if it is an attempted fraud, someone in the USA will doubtless be contacting the police or FBI about it.

[Doug_TrueCompanion]

Hi there!

I am sorry I did not respond sooner to the comments. I need to monitor postings more closely.

I understand how new and unusual our product is and so I understand the apprehension and questions.

I am sorry that we only were given 12 minutes by AEE staff to present her on stage. As you could tell from the presentation, we were told that we needed to wrap up and could not turn on the auditory feature due to the background noise level (listen to how loud it was there in the background on the video).

We are scheduling a demonstration with the press and will provide the link to their posting.

We are very happy to speak with anyone who would like to give us a call to discuss Roxxxy or her features.

Our number is 800-509-1730 and my personal extension is 707.

Thank you and speak with you soon!

Regards,

Douglas
Douglas Hines
DHines@TrueCompanion.com

[PsychoKirby]

Honestly, Mr. Hines, not to sound confrontational or anything, but since we're all here and you can clearly post here just fine, it would probably be a lot easier to just answer any of our questions here. I have a few myself.

1. To start, if I may be so blunt, why is TrueCompanion so ugly? I understand creating a convincing facsimile of a human being is no easy task, but Kokoro Dreams' Actroid looks better than Roxxxy. RealDolls look better than Roxxxy. Both of those are much less advanced than you claim Roxxxy is. I know most of your claims about Roxxxy have been related to its technological feats rather than its appearance, but even then this team of experts you claim worked on Roxxxy should be able to produce something that looks at least as good, if not better.

2. How much can Roxxxy move, exactly? At the AVN she seemed completely stiff. In the photos on the gallery Roxxxy is seen in various poses, which leads me to assume she's posable. And being posable is great for, say, a RealDoll, but you refer to TrueCompanion as a "sex robot" rather than a "sex doll", and ideally a robot would be capable of some independent movement.

3. I also would like to know just how Roxxxy's conversational abilities work. It seems she can only say pre-recorded sayings. And you know, with a lot of pre-recorded sayings you could decently simulate a conversation, but no matter what it would be limited. I heard somewhere she can piece together pre-recorded sounds to say a word she doesn't have recorded normally, but even that sounds kind of iffy. How do her conversational skills compare to ALICE? (Link for reference: http://www.pandorabots.com/pandora/talk ... d97e345aa1 ) Also, are you aware Hugh Loebner will offer $100,000 and a solid gold medal to whoever can create an AI that can pass the Turing test? (Another link: http://www.loebner.net/Prizef/loebner-prize.html ) If Roxxxy is as advanced as you claim, then you could easily win.

4. There's a very visible hole in Roxxxy's neck. I assume this is some sort of seam for her to turn her head (or rather, so you can pose her head). Isn't it dangerous for an electronic sex device to have a hole where...fluids could easily leak in or out? And I'm sorry to bring this up again, but RealDolls can have their heads turned too, and they have normal necks.

5. Are you familiar with Project Aiko? She's a robot designed by one person, and paid for with his own money. She can read, perform math equations, hold a conversation (with a text-to-speech generator so she's not confined to pre-recorded sayings), can move her arms and head on her own, and looks great too (although he just used a silicone sex doll for her body). So far, it seems that Aiko, designed by a single amateur on a budget, is more advanced than TrueCompanion, allegedly designed by a team of experts with a sizeable budget and nearly a decade's worth of time. If everything you say is true, then common sense dictates that TrueCompanion would have to be better than Aiko. I'd like to hear why.

6. I'd also like a picture, news article, some kind of proof of Trudy. I can't find any reference to it prior to TrueCompanion's announcement, which makes everything even more suspicious.

7. Are you familiar with a British film studio called Landmark Films? They've been working on a documentary on sex robots, and went to the Adult Entertainment Expo to see Roxxxy's demonstration. I was actually in talks with them to appear in their documentary (I backed out, though. It didn't seem right for me), and during one of my phone calls they mentioned they didn't see you demonstrating anything you claimed Roxxxy could do. I understand the Expo was loud which messed up Roxxxy's hearing, as you claimed, but was it not possible for you to give them a private demonstration somewhere quiet later? I'm assuming they told you in advance that they were coming and wanted to see Roxxxy. And appearing in the documentary would be nothing but good publicity for you. If Roxxxy works like you claim, then showing her off in the film would amount to the perfect commercial, and you wouldn't even need to pay a dime for it. Why didn't you give them a demonstration? I mean, I can't speak for the people at Landmark Films, but I know that if I crossed the Atlantic Ocean for something and didn't get it, I wouldn't be happy.

8. Lastly, I'd like to see your thoughts on David Levy's post, because everything he said has been a perfectly valid point.

[Doug_TrueCompanion]

Hi PsychoKirby.

Sure, more than happy to follow up.

Part of the learning curve we have been through with the doll and adult product community is that it is very important that we stay connected to everyone in the forums. Sounds obvious but we cannot wait to get calls about topics - we need to make sure that we answer any questions and offer feedback online, instead of waiting for people to call us with questions...

We setup a 24/7/365 phone service to keep the lines of communication open - but that is not good enough - so we are changing and we will watch the postings more closely.

What we are doing is very exciting! Now it is my job to be a better communicator and less of an engineer - to help spread the word and share our information with everyone!

It would be helpful if I explain the back story a bit to help paint the picture on the background of True Companion.

Please allow me to explain some topics which I would like to make sure are communicated to everyone.

I have a software development company which has been creating very innovative applications for many years. Our staff has worked on several military and commercial products — many of which include robots. I recently shared the names of some of these military robotic projects covered by our team in a private email to David. I do not want to publish the military projects our teammates have addressed even though they are part of the public record. If you would like to speak with me directly by calling or emailing me, I will provide you with some general public information regarding these projects.

When work is done on these types of projects, it is conducted in a fashion where information is not shared with people who do not need to know. This is meant to preserve confidentiality as well as to ensure that there is the opportunity to protect the inventions and always stay one step ahead of the competition.

As a matter of fact, regarding protecting inventions, filing a patent is many times counterproductive since you need to release vital details in the patent which can be used to circumvent the protection provided to you by patents.

One of the best methods to help protect your product is to utilize trade secrets. But if someone “stumbles” or uncovers how your protected algorithm or idea works, it is fair game for them to use.

We are utilizing both patents and trade secrets to protect our products.

So, my challenge is to share enough detail so that way everybody understands what our products can do without releasing too much information where our methods can be reverse engineered...

I have many times erred on the side of not releasing enough information.

We will correct this by publishing additional content as well as posting videos as well as sharing in the future the links to videos which news outlets publish, so everyone can see the detail…

We selected a fine arts model to pose as Roxxxy. We will also be allowing her faces to be swapped out so you can replace the face of Roxxxy and mix and match them to best meet your preference.

Regarding her ability to be positioned, Roxxxy can be posed.

Also, she has motors in her where they really help the experience in all three inputs. She also has a motor in her chest. Early on, we did want to release her with motors in the shoulders and the hips — but the amount of torque required to move the arms and especially the legs was so large that it dictated that very big, loud and expensive motors be utilized. The cost was too high and the loud sound detracted from the experience while contributing very little to improve the pleasure of “engaging” her.

Regarding her ability to speak, you hit on so many important points. We have been very troubled by the quality of the web chat applications on the market as well as their rendering (or lack thereof) to sound very realistic. It is because of these facts that we had to develop our own AI engine which handles the dialogue portion of Roxxxy. As a matter of fact, this area alone introduced many years of work for us to determine the best method to replicate this part of human interaction.

We ended up going with a hybrid model which uses a human’s voice as well as a computer generated voice for certain responses.

There are more than two methods to have a robot speak a sentence (i.e. using a prerecorded voice file of a sentence or using a computer voice generating the sentence). We have a third method which is a protected technique. I would rather share with you the experience rather than tell you how we do it. We will be posting some videos which cover this topic.

About her neck, you are correct. Having an opening would not be the best idea. We will not ship her with a gap.

Our approach to creating a TrueCompanion is one of love for our products and one which approaches engineering as a form of art.

There are many various approaches to making products. I would never say anything derogatory about anyone else’s work. What I will say is that we are bringing to market the most cost effective, innovative and creative solution which utilizes experts in various diverse fields to provide an amazing product. For instance, to apply the latest AI abilities to the full figure of a woman which is fully “functional”, performs (in many ways) sexually better than a real woman and has various personalities and knows your likes and dislikes, all for $7,000.00, is incredible. To be able to have a screen to easily formulate your girlfriend’s personality is amazing. To be able to create, edit and share the personalities of all of your girlfriends is very unique.

Trudy was not a product. It was my first “hobby” project which related to this technology. Being an electrical engineer and being curious about the topic of man/machine integration led me down this path.

And yes, we do need to share Roxxxy with the world! Right or wrong, as I mentioned before, I am very protective of Roxxxy. It is almost as if she is now part of our family and we need to keep an eye on her… I am not saying I was right… I am saying how I felt (actually, I still feel this way but it is obvious I need to share her more).

Regarding our terms and conditions, they are as consistent as possible with the products in the doll market.

The time and funding required for this undertaking has been tremendous. It is truly a labor of love and we are so excited to be able to share Roxxxy with everyone!

Our people are located in the US as well as in India.

In addition to the location in Lincoln Park, we also have a location in Brooklyn as well as staff/consultants throughout the country and the world.

We are also moving into a larger facility in NJ which will allow us more room to grow.

In closing, thank you for your reading all of this.

I am so happy to be able to share Roxxxy with you and I am here to stand behind her and to support you 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Please feel free to call me anytime at 800-509-1730 ext 707. If I am in the office or travelling, your call will reach me — it will forward to my cell phone, whether my wife likes it or not!



I look forward to speaking with you soon!

Thanks again.

Regards,

Douglas

Douglas Hines
Dhines@TrueCompanion.com

[DukeNukem 2417]

And so the epic race for PR to handle damage control begins.......

[33cl33]

Not to take sides or anything, but I think the point everyone above is trying to make is...

Put your money where your mouth is.

That reply really didn't say anything. Aside from inadvertently pointing out that you either hired a rather unattractive model for Roxxy's face, or did a poor job rendering her in artifice. We're not slamming your methods. On the contrary, if people on this site give criticism, it can only help you to figure out what needs work. There's no better grouping of minds on the topic of sex-enabled robots on the net!

Mostly, the above reply seemed like a lot of marketing double-speak. All of the more public robot designers out there that Psychokirby mentioned have been in the spotlight enough for their technology to be stolen, yet it hasn't. The market isn't that common or flooded to the point where that should even be a concern yet.

Do let us know when you have more video demonstrations available to check out... or some verifiable info to share. Until then, it all sounds a bit fishy.

But then again, we're all hopeful skeptics here

[davidlevylondon@yahoo.com]

To say that Douglas Hines's claims about Roxxxy sound "a bit fishy" is IMO a great understatement.

I simply do not believe him.

David Levy

[Doug_TrueCompanion]

Will do 33cl33.

I will provide the links.

Best regards,

Douglas

Douglas Hines
DHines@TrueCompanion.com

[tully]

The credibility gap here is massive, Doug. Let's look at this...

Here at FC you have what could be considered the BULLS-EYE in terms of your target audience. Each of us in some fashion has the "I WANT TO BELIEVE" banner hung in our respective ASFR closets. Yet nothing you've shown, talked about or provided has done a single thing to suggest anything more than a low-quality Realdoll knockoff with a tape recorder jammed in it's head. Some suspect that even that would be more than you're claiming to offer.

Collectively and individually, we've been burned before with claims of "breakthroughs" and products that are friendly or catered to our particular tastes. We're wary, but eager to see what is yet to come.

I'll also go out on a limb here to say, by and large, we're a good deal more savvy than your average customer. When we say "put up or shut up" we mean it. If we're toyed with our burned again, our wrath will be felt. Not just here, but across the internet. You may or may not have noticed that our particular fetish seems to enjoy it's fair share of online press. I suspect you know that, given the focus of your product.

SO before you go making huge and fantastic claims, think about it. Tread lightly here, sir. I hope you can deliver on half of what you're claiming.

(Sorry about that, I'll return to my lurking now)

[gmiceo]

For the $1k extra I get an ugly Real Doll wannabe. Sensors in areas of the doll, with some sort of pull string response. A handfull of parts thrown in to make the doll move it's hips and chew like any baby doll that eats food. Also in the Master Agreement I have to subscribe to some service. I assume this is the software co. Mr. Levy mentioned in his post that "sex robot" company also owns. I take it that with this software we can get new phrases like "There's a snake in my boot, or Someone's poisoned the water well".

I believe that this item, and company actually sets back the ASFR community as a whole. It is a laughable device that will be used for many years to come to ridicule us. Tully is right in saying that this is the area in which people, want, expect, and will buy robotic sex devices. It is also the greatest critic because of how long it has taken to get robots into the general public. Now that we are closer to acceptance with robots just being sexual in nature we don't need setbacks. I don't think it deserves any more attention, from the public community, but I would like to see the ASFR community try and minimize this as much as possible.

The fact that you didn't even consult with manufacturers that make up the bulk of your product is astounding. It took me three seconds to find Mr Levy who's book "Robots Unlimited" is an industry primer! No contact with silicone sex dolls was made, since we see how poor your doll is compared to the companies that have been doing this for over 10 years. The only thing you seem capable of doing is making a recording respond in 5 different ways to the push of a button. I am outraged at this, and embarassed by all the video out on it. There is no proof of your claims because you have none. Advertise your sex doll as some sort of Wetsy Betsy and stop pretending.

[Svengli]

What ever problems might be visible with True Companion, I would like to give Doug props for apparently making a massive effort here.

Technology is moving very rapidly and so things will be very different in, say, ten years. But people do have to actually work on this to eventually make it happen in a meaningful way. Doug is one of the people working hard on the "Fembot Challenge" and that is excellent.

Best,

S

[davidlevylondon@yahoo.com]

I must disagree with Svengali's suggestion that Douglas Hines has made "a massive effort here".

The only effort I have detected from Hines is one to con everyone into believing that he has developed a sex robot.

David Levy

[Rotwang]

Here is my $.02

Even if Hines made a massive effort it still falls short of very ambitious goals.

To be honest, Roxxy has the sex appeal of a half passed out drunk hooker long past her prime, sitting in a puddle of her own pee. And that's not even a criticism, that's an indicator of how hard it is to make a good robot that doesn't crash headlong into the uncanny valley.

Like Kishin said, somebody has to make the first step, but sometimes you have to stumble a few times before even making this first step. Roxxy is the first stumble. My only hope is that it pushes other people along. We're dealing with a potentially lucrative market, we just have to wait for the right people with the ambition, skill and talent to make something "right"

[davidlevylondon@yahoo.com]

Douglas Hines has gone very quiet, hasn't he.

Has anyone seen or heard anything new about Roxxxy during the past few months?

[Keizo]

Sadly, Landmark Films will be interviewing him very soon (if they haven't already this week). This will be for a BBC Channel 4 documentary in conjunction with The Discovery Channel. This is what I was told by Landmark, anyway.