4 ms·
It's actually an extremely good analogy (but in the opposite way of what you imply), as you don't own your job or your wife. Banning AI for job security is like
by raincole 1y ago
It's actually an extremely good analogy (but in the opposite way of what you imply), as you don't own your job or your wife. Banning AI for job security is like banning dildos because they make men feel insecure.
- atleastoptimal 1y agoThere's a difference in scale and potential consequences though What if there were some robot with superhuman persuasion and means of manipulating human urges such that, if it wanted to, it could entrap anyone it wanted to complete subservience? Should we happily acquiesce to the emerging cult-like influence these new entities have on susceptible humans? What if your parents messaged you one day, homeless on the street because they gave all their money and assets to a scammer robot that via a 300IQ understanding of human psychology manipulated them to sending all their money in a series of wire transfers?
- lucas_v 1y ago> superhuman persuasion and means of manipulating human urges such that, if it wanted to, it could entrap anyone it wanted to complete subservience Wow this potential/theoretical danger sounds a lot like the already existent attention economy; we're already manipulated at scale by "superhuman" algorithms designed to hijack our "human urges," create "cult-like" echo chambers, and sell us things 24/7. That future is already here
- atleastoptimal 1y agoWhich is true. People are scammed by very low-quality schemes (like that French woman who sent 1 million to the scammers who claimed to be Brad Pitt who for some reason needed money for medical procedures). Humans have generally a natural wariness/mental immune system response to these things however, and for 99% of people the attention economy is far from being able to completely upend their life or send all their money in an agreement made in bad faith by the other party. I don't see why, if some AI were to possess persuasion powers to a superhuman degree, would be able to cause 100x the damage when directed at the right marks.
- klipt 1y agoIt's not limited to men. A lot of feminists are also vocally against the idea of female sex bots because it makes them feel insecure.
- lazyfanatic42 1y ago"a lot of feminists", source?
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- klipt 1y agoJust search for feminist opinions on sex bots, there are tons.
- anonym29 1y agoAny idea why a bipedal fleshlight makes them insecure? My head jumps to "could it because they fear that without sex, they have no value?" but that sounds so ridiculous to me. All human life matters, has value, and should be treated with kindness, respect, and dignity. I've met plenty of women who add value to the world in a bajillion other ways. Can someone help me understand this one?
- CjHuber 1y agoI think you don’t get the point. It‘s about that if we are only trying to optimize for outcome, we will loose what makes it more than just biological. I don’t see how it makes sense that a women using a dildo is in any way similar to a human to human interaction, it’s more than just getting off right?
- gpt5 1y agoIs your suggestion to ban future sex robots in order to make sure that human-to-human connection is more robust? (I don't know the right answer, just that intuitively it seems not right to do it, even if the outcome of very good sex robots means less couples / less children / etc.).