Future of Artificial Intelligence

[7Wannabe5]

@chenda:

Thanks, but I think Margaret Atwood already wrote that novel. Also, I think that would be a bit like imagining the barn doors open when the cow is already well on its way to the burger factory.

I'll add the Perry book to my list. Thanks for the recommendation.

[daylen]

Another scaling metric focused on task completion time:
https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.14499

(Though if the sex bots reign then perhaps not much time is needed )

[Henry]

(Though if the sex bots reign then perhaps not much time is needed )

Charlie Sheen once made the comment that he pays hookers to leave. Yes, he made the comment with typical bro bravado and possible misogynistic snideness, the type of comment that I myself have been so unjustly accused of making. But my real point is that the comment is replete with profound economic implications. With a sex bot, there is the option to limit the engagement to the pure sex act only, thereby eliminating any ancillary time spent with a sex worker that is monetized outside the sex act itself i.e. you pay someone a hour's wages for work completed in much less time. Sex bots also eliminate risk of STD's, as well as the more risky and sometimes downright illegal, inhumane and nefarious issues surrounding utilization of sex workers. But the real issue is that sex bots provide the most significant advantage to the consumer, cost savings, often expressed as more bang for the buck which is really the tagline for the entire consortium of sexbot manufacturers.

You can read this thread title two ways: "artificial intelligence" as the object of the sentence or "future" as the object of the sentence.

I have moved from the former reading to the latter reading. So to me it's "The Age of Artificial Intelligence" as some describe the Ice Age. It will end at some point with a new development but not in our lifetimes.

And the reason I believe this is that the technological step change I see is that human beings are intentionally and systematically developing a non-human workforce that will compete directly with the human workforce. Technology has always been a displacer but has heretofore been expressed in terms of advancement (reduction of workload). Now the stated purpose is the benefit(s) that utilizing a non-human worker provides over utilizing a human worker when both are qualified to do the job. When it comes to sex bots, this development would be seen as a benefit to law enforcement, human rights activists, social workers, the medical industry as well as insurance companies. It would be seen non-beneficial to condom manufacturers and wedding planners until they make bots that can be impregnated which will be a legal clusterfuck every law student has wet dreams about and society granting the same legal rights to human/bot relationships as they do to human/human relationships. Domestic violence would be an issue. It seems difficult to press charges against a person for beating the shit out of something that they not only bought but comes with a warranty but I guess if there is an I-baby involved, it would be relevant. They will have to parse out all the legalities.

[chenda]

By 2125 sex with another human might be regarded as revolting and soon to be banned on public heath grounds.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=h4xUJuw9bmo

[7Wannabe5]

@Henry:

There's truth to the Sheen comment, but men are also frequently willing to pay more for Girlfriend Experience Escorts than Simple Sex Prostitution Experience, and this has also often historically been leveled up to overtly financially supporting a Mistress or similar relationship. So, I think the full range of circumstances and motivations that inform the desire for feminine companionship across the spectrum would have to be considered if sex bots are to become a threat to the livelihood of both street pimps and wedding planners.

OTOH, the Sheen comment could be generalized and expanded to 'Men pay women in order to avoid engaging in emotional work towards personal growth in their own feminine energy at any level of relationship with them." Another classic example would be giving your wife some expensive jewelry to make good for incident of sexual cheating rather than confronting yourself in couple's therapy. My initial take on the kind of guy who would hire a Girlfriend Experience Escort was that he must be some kind of pathetic loser, but really as I learned from my friend who engaged in the trade, they were pretty varied, although also all readily explained under the umbrella of this generalization.

Also, truth be told, sometimes this is the form of masculine energy a women most desires from a given man, just like as Deida noted, sometimes women want men for their masculine "killer" energy. So, men doing work in their own feminine energy at Level Green are often in a tricky spot, before they are able to integrate these aspects of reality at a higher level. As in, "No fucking way am I going to be able to do empathetic listening and open vulnerability and then also still open the car door, pick up the check for dinner, make sure the house is secure, and then toss her about on the bed for a solid hour. Not fair! Where's that SexBot order form?"

[Henry]

I don't think this is an appropriate place to work out the taxonomy of sex workers, but non-GFE and GFE have no time element distinction. It's what services the sex worker is willing to provide. And bots can provide GFE. Or maybe they can. I admittedly have never fucked a robot. You can make the argument that GFE is only going to expedite the desired end result. It's not a zero sum game but sexbots unequivocally will impact the overall income generated by the human workers involved in the world wide sex trade industry. I think pimps, ho's, strippers, courtesans, everyone monetizing their secondary sexual characteristics or other's secondary sexual characteristics all need to start factoring this development into their income projections.

But it will impact cleaning services, home aid workers, surgeons, whoever. Would I rather have a bot do heart surgery on me or a human? When their capabilities are equal, I'm going bot. Don't have to worry about a bot having an extra martini during lunch. Same with driving. When capability is equal, I'm going with the one that eliminates human error not to mention any possibility of the release of a prolonged, Pierogi fart on a hot summer afternoon in a smog ridden city.

Also, dangerous jobs. Like how they have robots for explosives dismantling. I mean, is that a job we really want humans to have. Or executioners. The person who wants that job really shouldn't have any job. I mean what's that interview like "Tell us Mr. Bundy, what is it about killing people that gets you out of bed every morning." I saw two nice DPW guys removing dirt from a dump truck and I'm like, nothing personal, but a non-human can do this shit a helluva lot better, faster and cheaper. No health. No pension. No workmen's comp. No issues with weather or taking your eye off the shovel when an attractive human walks by.

[7Wannabe5]

Yeah, if I think about it, there might be some upsides to a Robotic Musical Theater Date/Escort for my old age. I guess my perspective on this is different, because I already assume I am going to have to "pay" in some way for this service. I think the essential problem with designing a sex robot for the female market would be that the robot would be inherently capable of making more money doing other things. IOW, the successful invention of such a robot could only occur within a field that had already been disrupted from capitalism, because sexual status competition between human males is essential to capitalism. Capitalism could still exist within the paradigm of successful production of sex robots for male market, but only in the form of an ever tightening loop.

[Henry]

I think there needs to be a segregation between sexbots and domestic bots. They can be both, or maybe you get two, but I think for the most part bots will become part of the household like the butler in Family Affair or Alice in The Brady Bunch as opposed to Lassie in, um, Lassie. More human than pet. More human than electronic device even though you have to plug it in the socket every night. George Saunders has been writing about the absurdity of what is becoming a "realer" and more embodied co-habitation with technology for years.