The Sex Singularity: When Machines Surpass Human Hotness


21 Responses to “The Sex Singularity: When Machines Surpass Human Hotness”

  1. Xeni Jardin says:

    I thought that read “Batboy” at first glance. Man I miss Batboy. He was hot. WWN FTW.

  2. Jeff says:

    It’s so wierd, I was thinking about that sex bot post and was trying to remember what the original Greek story was called “Pig…?” Design it the way you want it, with all the right emotional feedback. “I’m just an AI, but I know what I’m feeling is real. I love you Bender.” And then I though of Cherry 2000. I’m glad I’m not the only one.


  3. jjasper says:

    Until I’m able to somehow give an AI an orgasm, machine sex will just be enjoyable jerking off. For some people, sex is self centered, an only a means to pleasure for them. For sane people (by which I mean people like me, heh), it’s a physical dialog.

  4. hapax_legomenon says:

    Wow, I actually have something interesting to add to this discussion.

    I know sexbot stories are a dime a dozen, but here is a creative commons story I wrote in 1994. It’s pretty comic.

    Erotic Notion #27: Supersex 3000 .

    (BTW, the webdomain is NSFW and the story page itself is explicit, though the page itself has 1 tasteful graphic).

  5. Moon says:

    I HATE tasteful graphics! :D

    /However, I didn’t even see them – the page is 404.

  6. Maurice Reeves says:

    As an aside to this, I have been wondering for a while now what will happen as more people use the internet for porn, and having that computer there with them becomes part of the arousal? At what point does the brain associate the computer not just as what we work with, but as a necessary part of sex?

  7. Baumi says:

    That reminds me of Stanislav Lem’s old story “The Washing-Machine Tragedy”.

    A (rather uninspired and confusing) abstract of that great story can be found here:

  8. A New Challenger says:

    “And what was the name of Billy’s planet?



  9. Anonymous says:

    Not Canada. There’s already rumbling in Canada to outlaw any private ownership of sexbots, among other regulations:

  10. Joe says:

    Scott Adams covered this ground some years ago, though we haven’t kept up with his predicted timing.

    Dogbert: “I can predict the future by assuming that money and male hormones are the driving forces for new technology. Therefore when virtual reality gets cheaper than dating, society is doomed.”

    The last frame is dated “Year 2004″ and has a woman at the door asking Dogbert, “Is Dilbert available?” to which Dogbert replies, “He’s been in the holodeck since March.”

  11. sp160n says:

    Fry: Did you hear that? She likes me.
    Professor Hubert Farnsworth: Well Duh, she’s programmed to like you.
    Fry: But this is Lucy Liu, perhaps the only good actress of the 20th century. She’s more then just a piece of software.
    Lucy Liu robot: Would you like to take a moment to register me?
    Fry: Hmm, not right now.
    Lucy Liu robot: [tussling Fry's hair] I’ll remind you later, you hot stud you.

  12. Anonymous says:

    Wait … where’s the story? I enjoyed the snippets quoted above, but can’t find the link to the rest.

  13. hapax_legomenon says:

    Ok, let’s try again. Here is Erotic Notion #27: Supersex 3000 .

  14. Marshall says:

    It’s Cherry 2000 all over again.

  15. Felixe says:

    Good news everyone!

    Sexbots aren’t in the near feature. First we have to get good senses – taste, smell and sweat. Then you can go wild.

    But things are advancing quickly.

    I’d be really intrigued to see the future foreplay rituals: downloading an alternate firmware with “more features” and expecting an open hardware version really soon with some extra features (among those, the capability of loading more personae, a la Frets on Fire.)

  16. noen says:

    Xeni Jardin
    “I thought that read “Batboy” at first glance. Man I miss Batboy. He was hot.”

    Batboy got fragged in Iraq.

  17. Teresa Nielsen Hayden / Moderator says:

    I expect it’ll be a non-universal kink, like latex.

    What I wonder is how many other kinks lie dormant within us, waiting for the equivalent of latex or sexbots to be invented?

  18. sabik says:

    @jjasper #2: I suspect simulating an orgasm wouldn’t be at all difficult.

    It’s been claimed that people respond to the Pleo as though it were a living creature. I guess it’s easier to fool the more ancient parts of our brains — and sex is very ancient.

  19. jjasper says:

    @ Sabik #12 A simulated orgasm is about as fun as cooking a meal for a garbage disposal that goes “yum” when you press the disposal button. I’m sure it’s someone’s kink, but it’s not mine.

  20. LOLcat Stevens says:

    Machine sex fetishes seem to rely in part on the active knowledge that it’s a machine you’re interacting with. I’m sure that bots could be “hot” within this limited realm, but how far is this robo-desire likely to, um, extend into the general population?

    The comments here seem to be envisioning some Stepford Wife/Husband that can really convincingly equal or surpass a human partner. I’m with jjasper on this one, in that I don’t think that fooling the ancient parts of the brain into making an object seem “alive” would be quite enough to make sex with said object seem “real.” There’s a lot of information that gets passed via subtle physical cues, and even with really fancy AI, I doubt you’d be able to overcome the knowledge that you’re interacting with a machine. It brings a whole new layer of meaning to the “uncanny valley.”

    People find all sorts of ways to get off, but no matter how sophisticated a sex toy you build, I think it’s only going to be a certain segment of the population that will find it “hot.”

Leave a Reply