Thoughts on super-strength

[Frostillicus]

The whole "psychic" thing comes with its own slew of issues and any glitch in those can ruin your life as well be it via social media or emotional blackmail or psychological damages. But back to strength, I'm pretty sure this all started with the original fembots from Kill Oscar and Fembots in Vegas. Up to that point some of the only crazy strong ones appeared in Man From U.N.C.L.E, in ONE episode of Star Trek (the others were not overly strong) and also the doll from Wonders Of Aladdin but not the "Silver Maid" from 1940's Thief of Bagdad since she didn't kill with strength. No; I think the original fembots set the standard for strong since they had to compete with bionics and were not created for sex (except in all our heads!) but did have sex appeal. Before then, it wasn't really much of an issue or necessary plot device from Hephaestus to Der Sandman to Helen O'Loy to Westworld to Stepford. After that, though... it looks like pop culture ran with it and we haven't had many non-strong examples since.

For some it may be the desire to control something more powerful than oneself or part of it may be that it gives an excuse to hit a girl and part of it may be that a lot of it isn't written by techno-sexuals. But since that was some of the only content available, it became part of the thrill while WE were growing up. Sexy assassins have always had their place although I understand they are not made just for sex as you have pointed out. You are right; in those cases it's just plain stupid. The point I was making was that it's just plain stupid to personally have a fembot JUST for sex and I'd want a partner that can actually be useful and keep up with me but to each their own. There's plenty of other questions we can ask. Why do fembots have teeth? Why not just soft fake teeth like realdolls while we're on the issue? People still keep pit-bulls around. We get it. You don't like something you can't easily overcome but to me, that can be part of the fun. I'm bowing out now. You guys can keep arguing.

[Cecilauthor]

The whole "psychic" thing comes with its own slew of issues and any glitch in those can ruin your life as well be it via social media or emotional blackmail or psychological damages.

Just to be clear, the sample stories I've uploaded here include a robot well on her way to technological singularity, left alone for years to develop abilities that her manufacturers didn't intend. So no one meant to build her with psychic abilities. And she's still not super strong.

[darkbutflashy]

Strength doesnt have to be "super" to be strong. If an average fembot weighs around 150 pounds or so (that sounds heavy but remember the components weigh a bit), its got to be able to move its own weight around. Add to that the ability to do that in a fluid and realistic motion, and you're looking at lots of engineering to get that effect which means more motors, sensors, etc.

I second that, with the notion it would be hard to build a robot without super-human strength. The problem is that any machine has a loss which fraction of the overall power is higher the smaller the machine gets. Big machines are more efficient than small ones. For any given technology, there is a lower limit where it cannot be made smaller without throwing away most of the energy of the fuel. Plus, any energy thrown away turns into heat and thus, cooling problems.

We (like all living) are the ones built of nanotechnology and any of our own inventions has a hard time to compete nature in compactness and maintaining low energy levels. E.g. all our motor functions work at molecular level, there are special proteins which bend their neck a small angle when activated, and the nervous system controlling it has a core voltage of 0.07 Volts.

[Cecilauthor]

the notion it would be hard to build a robot without super-human strength. The problem is that any machine has a loss which fraction of the overall power is higher the smaller the machine gets. Big machines are more efficient than small ones. For any given technology, there is a lower limit where it cannot be made smaller without throwing away most of the energy of the fuel. Plus, any energy thrown away turns into heat and thus, cooling problems.
We (like all living) are the ones built of nanotechnology and any of our own inventions has a hard time to compete nature in compactness and maintaining low energy levels. E.g. all our motor functions work at molecular level, there are special proteins which bend their neck a small angle when activated, and the nervous system controlling it has a core voltage of 0.07 Volts.

Well that's simply a question of power source, a problem we'll have to solve before real fembots become a possibility. Such a robot wouldn't be useful inside your home; because if they needed to maintain such a high level of energy in order to move, they would destroy door handles and home appliances. (to say nothing of their's owner's spinal column) They'd have to be able to ratchet back their strength to remain around humans in a domestic or brothel setting. If they can't do that and maintain efficient power consumption they can't really function as fembots at all. It's a hurdle for science.

But the choice to make a robot able to play steel prison-bars like harp strings would be a deliberate and dangerous one. You'd have to build their skeleton out of titanium, with actuators to match. Realistically, engineers will wait until power expenditure is more efficient, and make the skeleton out of some light alloy or polymer. In terms of product liability, home/brothel robots strong enough to hog-tie a backhoe would be far too risky to be considered for mass-production.

[darkbutflashy]

Well that's simply a question of power source, a problem we'll have to solve before real fembots become a possibility. Such a robot wouldn't be useful inside your home; because if they needed to maintain such a high level of energy in order to move, they would destroy door handles and home appliances.

The problem is weight and heat losses. A robot can have e.g. small electrical motors in it's arms to move the fingers of a hand, each of it not more powerful than that of our fingers. But with our present technology, high efficiency means high weight. And high weight means the arms and shoulders must be powered by far more powerful motors than we have. As an alternative skip the efficiency, than you have to supply a bigger engine in the machine, which adds weight, too. Gives me a headache.

[xodar]

A fembot simply wouldn't be made with super strength. There wouldn't be any need for it and if you used her for tasks requiring it her appearance might be damaged.

Robots, as the technology advances, will have the strength appropriate for their purpose and one intended to be a companion for sex and ordinary activities wouldn't need to be any stronger than the average human. It could be somewhat less so.
Robots intended for heavy lifting tasks would be designed for them. They'd resemble current machines used for that purpose and elaborations on these and they would have little ability to make decisions beyond those needed for specific tasks. They might be able to perform some tasks only when instructed by a remote or a verbal command. Why would they be made more versatile than necessary?

Form and ability will follow function except in the case of "artbots".

[--NightBattery--]

'artbot' .. .
I like that term.

[King Snarf]

But I'll hack Stephaniebot, and make her fight off the evil fembot. Girl fight. Rowwwr.

Your theories intrigue me, and I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter.

[xodar]

'artbot' .. .
I like that term.

As the technology advance there'll be bots constructed simply for aesthetic purposes...often even useless for any practical purpose.

[Cecilauthor]

Your theories intrigue me, and I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter.

You can start by reading these:
http://www.literotica.com/s/fleshware-requiem-book-01

There are three entries that make up the novel.

You can also friend Xavier Cecil on Facebook.