Found this.

[jakeCTom]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/2 ... 07584.html

essentially a report on sexbots.

[jolshefsky]

Oh swell, an interview with Douglas Hines and his vaporware ...

[jakeCTom]

What's up with that dude, anyways?

[gmiceo]

"Sex only goes so far — then you want to be able to talk to the person," Hines said at a 2010 demonstration of the Roxxy bot.

"Hines, an artificial intelligence engineer, told HuffPost Live that he got the idea for the creating a humanoid companion after he lost a friend in the September 11 attacks. He said he wanted to develop a software application for the deceased's children that would "replicate" their father's personality. When he decided to monetize the concept, Hines found a natural market in the adult entertainment industry. "

Wow he sure does change his story around to whatever is convenient. That's the fist time I have heard that he created this because of 9/11 reasons. How does that play with the fact that he created his first "robot" in 1993? It says that on his own website. We must now assume that Mr. Hines is psychic and saw these needs coming.

[Miss Pris]

Roxxy's personalities seem largely limited to passive and/or "whore" from the demos on the site. She also has a distinctly "unready" feeling, as if they released her a few years ahead of the technology they really wanted to use. She doesn't fulfill either the fleshy-realness potentiality or the artificial/metal/"machinic" slick and sexy role; she seems to be a compromise of machine, doll, and AI that makes her feel... clunky to me. Artificial companions for sex, dating, AND discussion are not quite ready yet, and though I know many people are desperately waiting, I'm not sure they should be marketed until they're better. Am I being too demanding given the state of the technology? Maybe. I'm sure she's made many people happy...