Inspiration for the sex robot sprang from the September 11, 2001 attacks. "I had a friend who passed away in 9/11," Hines said. "I promised myself I would create a program to store his personality, and that became the foundation for Roxxxy True Companion."
What a load of tripe. You can promise yourself anything but this seems to be just a convenient hook to attach a quest for money and an advanced sex toy to.
There is nothing respectful about having someone pass away like that and then to use their memory as an excuse for something this tasteless. Assuming that's even true.
If I were his friend I'd feel less than honoured. Something along the lines of 'thanks for remembering but leave me out of it please'.
Or are 9/11 victims now fair game in marketing nonsense?
The AI claim is also complete rubbish.
She can't vacuum but "has a full C cup and is ready for action", that's some impressive AI there.
The bit where he's awkwardly fingering the sex doll's uncanny valley to trigger some robotic response is the most depressing thing I've seen so far this year.
It might at first look like a puppet with pre-recorded voice samples trigger by buttons. But looking at her face you can see clearly that her advanced artificial intelligence is just too shocked to still move her body or close her mouth.
After watching that I wondered: this is AI? Is it anything more complicated than various sensor interrupts to a processor that then outputs a voice sample depending on the sensor and the "personality" setting?
"Robotic movement is built into 'the three inputs' and a mechanical heart that powers a liquid cooling system."
That's just creepy. Not the fact that a heart-like pump keeps the internal computer cool. The fact that someone, somewhere, is falling asleep to a mechanical heartbeat...
AI-driven is a bit of a stretch here. If you include common sense perception, reasoning and action, this robot is far from state of the art. Did I read that right, that it can't move any limbs? How can one possibly even come close to thinking this thing is real?
That brings an interesting point. I'm not particularly well informed here, but i'm curious. Most genetic algorithms I've seen work by taking a source adding a "mutation" then testing it against a goal. How would a genetic algorithm change if there wasn't a defined goal, but instead an eco-system that decides for itself what is most desirable.
That one detail, I did not expect.