Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Anime Robotics Hardware Idle

Company Unveils Personalized Anime Robot Girl 240

Posted by samzenpus from the I'm-so-very-lonely dept.
MrSeb writes "It seems, as a culture, we have a deep-seated interest in robots and automatons, and if we can love an animal or other non-humanoid creature, what's to stop us from falling in love with a robot? Introducing Meka Robotics' S2 Humanoid Head: It has seven degrees of freedom, high-resolution FireWire cameras in each eye, zero-backlash Harmonic Drive gearing in the neck, and a ton of unnervingly-human movements and postures. She weighs 7.6kg (16.7lbs), has a pair of luminous, waggling doggy-like ears, and can be attached to a Meka torso and arm, if you prefer your robots to be slightly more corporeal. The girly, anime face is just a custom skin, incidentally: Meka will customize the shell to look like anything you desire. We're told that they value their client's confidentiality — and more importantly they don't judge. Powered by the open-source and extensible M3 control software, the S2 head (and body and arm) could be quite easily upgraded to use Hooman Samani's artificial endocrine and psychological models — and if you had the choice of falling in love with an amorphous, decidedly odd-looking furball, or a cute, perky anime girl, which would you choose?"

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Company Unveils Personalized Anime Robot Girl More

Company Unveils Personalized Anime Robot Girl

Comments Filter:

  • Love (Score:4, Insightful)

    by TechLA ( 2482532 ) on Thursday October 13, 2011 @02:13AM (#37698802)
    Seriously, what's the fun with seeking love in an robot.. It's not like finding a lovely girl/guy is that hard. Much of the love comes from the fact he or she is a thinking person with own thoughts, and doesn't always just do or say what you want to. And if you're just looking for sex, just get an one night stand or a paid girl.

    • Software bots are pretty advanced these days. Throw in a text to speech translator and inputs from sensors in different parts of the body. I reckon you could persuade granddad to leave his net worth to a robot. And he would die happy.

      • I want to make out with Hatsune Miku!! And she can sing too!

        Seriously, I'd bet she's at the top of the prototype list just for fandom.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by macraig ( 621737 )

      Robots don't judge unfairly or hold grudges, unless god forbid they're deliberately programmed to behave that way.

    • Re:Love - Obligitory (Score:3, Insightful)

      by EnempE ( 709151 )

      It's not like finding a lovely girl/guy is that hard.

      You're new here aren't you :-)

    • Re:Love (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Geeky ( 90998 ) on Thursday October 13, 2011 @05:35AM (#37699566)

      You pay her. You see her quite regularly. You sort of become friends but deep down you know she's telling you what you want to hear to keep you happy - all part of the customer service. Then she says she's given up working but will still see you - you're a gray area. Since there was no need for her to say that, you believe her. You see her more often. You fall in love. You ask her out. She says she doesn't want to complicate things while money's involved but she's looking for a normal office job. You suspect she's still working. Although you only see her once every couple of weeks you hear from her every couple of days and get insecure if you don't. Half of you wants to know the truth - is it just what it is, or is there something real there? You dream of a future together but she's probably laughing at you behind your back and all the way to the bank while continuing to provide service as usual to anyone who's got the cash.

      So, in summary, go easy on the paid girls.

      (true story, by the way. happened to a, er, friend)

    • Some people would be quite happy with a cute but Tsundere robot girlfriend telling them how perverted they are.
       

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by TheCarp ( 96830 )

        rotfl my wife just got the dvd of that movie recently, after seeing the clips of it in that MC Chris music video "Japanese Maid".

        We haven't watched it yet but it looks amazing lol.

        I never really fantasized about being robosexual, but if a robot looked like the girl in that movie, I think I would give it a try.

        This thing however um.... I mean... it doesn't even have any orifices? When I saw that they "don't judge" and "robot head", shit, I was expecting at least a mouth orifice with an attempt at a silicone

      • So, one Nozomi-bot coming up!...mega-pervert.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tgd ( 2822 )

      I dunno, you spend half your time in a relationship trying to figure out how to turn your partner on, and the other half wishing you could turn them off.

      A robot may be an improvement.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by durrr ( 1316311 )
      You could program your robot girlfriend to wake you up with a blowjob.
      Suggest programming your girlfriend anything and see how she react.

    • Seriously, it's not like it's some passing fad either. I know they're an obsessive people by nature, but Jesus Christ, for decades now they've been CRAZY about robots (and technology in general, but ESPECIALLY robots). I mean they're fucking INSANE about robots. Granted, I guess it's a better obsession for them to have than empire-building, but wouldn't more varied interests be a little more healthy?

      • From the Japanese folks I've met in real life, their entire culture is built around being socially awkward. I think that's why their pop culture deals with the robot-love genre better than anyone else. (Chobits from CLAMP is the de facto masterpiece of the genre and picks apart the ethics of robots better than anyone since Asimov.)

      • Seriously, it's not like it's some passing fad either. I know they're an obsessive people by nature, but Jesus Christ, for decades now they've been CRAZY about robots (and technology in general, but ESPECIALLY robots). I mean they're fucking INSANE about robots. Granted, I guess it's a better obsession for them to have than empire-building, but wouldn't more varied interests be a little more healthy?

        What's a "more valid" interest? Celebrity gossip? Sports? Reality TV?

        What's so unhealthy about being interested in robotics?

        Jeez!

    • Much of the love comes from the fact he or she is a thinking person with own thoughts

      Apparently, for some guys talking to Eliza [wikipedia.org] is already too deep. Let alone communicating with a real woman.

      Who knows? Perhaps giving them something to play with so they don't pass on their genes might actually be good for our gene pool. Is that mean? ;)

  • No Mouth (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 13, 2011 @02:13AM (#37698804)

    Where do I put my penis then?

  • This... (Score:2, Insightful)

    by errandum ( 2014454 )

    This makes me sad in so many levels... ):

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by sjames ( 1099 )

      It's just another sign that society is wearing water skis and a leather jacket.

    • Re:This... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by vadim_t ( 324782 ) on Thursday October 13, 2011 @02:55AM (#37698970) Homepage

      Why, I think it's awesome.

      We'll probably have good humanoid robots before we have human-like intelligence. But that's okay, because you still can use the bot for telepresence. Think about being able to have a walk in a park, or help in some physical way a friend who is on the other side of the planet.

      With a good enough bot and control system it could be completely revolutionary. Lots and lots of applications: making things easier for old and handicapped people, virtually visiting remote and hard to access locations, remote customer service where an operator connects to a local bot...

      I'm quite happy to see people contribute to the development of such things

  • Awesome (Score:3)

    by vadim_t ( 324782 ) on Thursday October 13, 2011 @02:20AM (#37698830) Homepage

    Progress seems to be steadily moving towards making Chobits a reality.

    They should make sure to use redundant SSDs for storage, and have backup functionality, though. Hard drives lead to tragedy.

  • DON'T DATE ROBOTS! (Brought to you by the Space Pope.)

    http://www.hulu.com/watch/4510/futurama-anti-robot-propaganda [hulu.com]

  • Making people's harem anime dreams come true...several tens of thousands of dollars at a time.

    P.S.: A feminine robot not made in Japan? :O
  • The bitch is cold, really cold. I see rejection all over her face. Uh, what? It's a male robot?!?!? THANK GOD!!!

  • Women have it hard in the future (Score:5, Interesting)

    by goose-incarnated ( 1145029 ) on Thursday October 13, 2011 @02:40AM (#37698922) Journal

    Seriously, they do

    The feminist activists convinced women that they can act just as men do, resulting in this free-sex utopia. I think it was Freakonomics that pointed out that the price of sex has dropped since the 30's. Prostitutes used to cost more than the median monthly wage, now they cost the price of a meal - so if you're single and horny, which would you rather do - go on a first date and *maybe* get laid by the second date or simply pay the price of that meal and get laid?

    Of course, men pursue sex - that's how we are built - and in the past we needed to commit to a woman to get assured of sex on a regular basis. Now with feminists making the argument that society won't judge women who are promiscuous, some women believe them, lowering the value of women in general. If I'm looking for a long-term relationship, I expect Mary to put out by the third date or so, and if she doesn't, I'll find my long-term relationship with Susan, who *will* put out.

    Just for sex, though, even porn causes a drop in the value of women; whats going to happen when VR means that you can have a virtual g/friend for sex? That's an even further drop.

    Yes, of course there will be men who still want a real women, but you cannot escape the fact that demand is dropping.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by vadim_t ( 324782 )

      Why just women?

      I think overall it ought to balance in women's favour actually. Both men and women could conceivably get a sex bot of the opposite gender. But reproduction is still actually done by women. A woman can go with artificial insemination when she wants, and problem solved. A man can't have children with his bot, he still needs to find an actual woman for that.

       

    • Explain the navy please. If men are so obsessed with sex why do MEN volunteer to spend months if not years at sea with no females? No, not all US sailors are gay. Okay, most of them but not all. Some are bi.

      But seriously, this myth that men are obsessed with sex needs to die.

      • Explain the navy please. If men are so obsessed with sex why do MEN volunteer to spend months if not years at sea with no females?

        Because in humans, the pursuit of sex tends to abstract into the pursuit of the availability of sex. This means doing stuff which ultimately makes one more attractive to the opposite sex.

        To use a money analogy, what's more valuable? A million dollars in cash, or the ability to easily earn $10,000 any time, any where?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jamesh ( 87723 )

        But seriously, this myth that men are obsessed with sex needs to die.

        Well... since lifeforms split into male and female, and the female landed the bigger biological burden of making a new lifeform, there's been a big payoff for the male to be obsessed with sex. And there is a corresponding payoff for the female to be picky about who she lets make a new lifeform inside her. You'll always find exceptions of course, but myths tend to have some truth behind them.

        For humans, the biological factors have changed dramatically in the last 50 years or so (effective birth control on th

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dkf ( 304284 )

          For humans, the biological factors have changed dramatically in the last 50 years or so (effective birth control on the one hand, and far greater risk of disease on the other) but that doesn't instantly undo millions of years of evolution.

          WTF? While you're right about birth control, you're dead wrong about disease risk. The invention of antibiotics has made a gigantic difference to disease risk, and while resistance is starting to increase the risk is still massively lower than it was for virtually all of human history. Things that were death sentences 100 years ago can now be cured (or at least contained) with pharmaceuticals. (I wouldn't say that we should trust big pharma, but they've managed to do a lot of good for all that. Their proble

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by jamesh ( 87723 )

            For humans, the biological factors have changed dramatically in the last 50 years or so (effective birth control on the one hand, and far greater risk of disease on the other) but that doesn't instantly undo millions of years of evolution.

            WTF? While you're right about birth control, you're dead wrong about disease risk. The invention of antibiotics has made a gigantic difference to disease risk, and while resistance is starting to increase the risk is still massively lower than it was for virtually all of human history. Things that were death sentences 100 years ago can now be cured (or at least contained) with pharmaceuticals. (I wouldn't say that we should trust big pharma, but they've managed to do a lot of good for all that. Their problem is that the low-hanging fruit is now mostly gone; future advances are going to be much harder won.)

            You can throw all the antibiotics you like at HIV, Herpes, HPV, and viral hepatitis, and it won't do much except expose the recipient to increased risk of yeast infections. Sure, there are drugs for controlling those to some extent but... you know... better to not catch them in the first place.

            And bacteria as a whole are slowly becoming immune to the various antibiotics we do throw at them, and there is some concern that we'll be right back where we started at some point in the future unless we can come up

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by UpnAtom ( 551727 )

        It's cute for me to join in with this Big Bang Theory discussion (the first series before they all got laid).

        I've never felt any real desire to join the navy but men also seek adventure, honour and glory. There are many Hollywood films glamourising naval life.

        You also imply that men plan extensively, or even understand their sexual drives. I suspect an average man's sex drive can be satiated by sex eg with a prostitute once every two months. The problem for most unmarried men is that they get used to fre

      • Explain the navy please. If men are so obsessed with sex why do MEN volunteer to spend months if not years at sea with no females? No, not all US sailors are gay. Okay, most of them but not all. Some are bi.

        But seriously, this myth that men are obsessed with sex needs to die.

        Most men, even young and virile ones, spend a lot of their time not having sex. Unless you're a film/rock star or something, the desire far outweighs the actual execution

        So if you go to sea for a couple of months, for most people you're probably missing out on two or three random fucks.

        YMMV, no doubt everyone else on slashdot slept with a couple of different people every day of the week when they were young.

    • Re:Women have it hard in the future (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Asic Eng ( 193332 ) on Thursday October 13, 2011 @05:17AM (#37699472)

      Well the price of sex sinking is certainly a good thing, it means both men and women have more of it. Also while I find the "feminism = free sex" claim more than dubious (that's really not how it happened historically) - feminist would likely argue that women should not be valued as providers of sex, but for their skills and accomplishments. It's true though that this can be bad news for those women who have neither.

      Women have more options today - they don't need to get married in order to have an income, they can pursue their own careers and their own goals in life. So while demand from men for marriage has dropped, the same applies for women, too.

      Now neither men nor women are forced to have a relationship or enter marriage in order to have an income or to get sex. That changes many things and that's not necessarily easy. Overall it's good to have freedom to chose, though.

      • Well the price of sex sinking is certainly a good thing, it means both men and women have more of it. Also while I find the "feminism = free sex" claim more than dubious (that's really not how it happened historically) - feminist would likely argue that women should not be valued as providers of sex, but for their skills and accomplishments. It's true though that this can be bad news for those women who have neither.

        Women have more options today - they don't need to get married in order to have an income, they can pursue their own careers and their own goals in life. So while demand from men for marriage has dropped, the same applies for women, too.

        Now neither men nor women are forced to have a relationship or enter marriage in order to have an income or to get sex. That changes many things and that's not necessarily easy. Overall it's good to have freedom to chose, though.

        It's hard to undo the instincts honed over millions of years of evolution. The average females instinct, no matter how independent and successful she is, is still to "settle" with a provider (due to the large investment she makes in the offspring). That hasn't changed. The males instinct (to spread seed far and wide due to lesser investment in offspring) is to mate with as many females as possible. This also hasn't changed.

        What has changed is that society is now trying to convince women that they can emulat

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by rastos1 ( 601318 )

      in the past we needed to commit to a woman to get assured of sex on a regular basis.

      Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

    • Thats a fairly stunning collection of pig ignorant misogynistic lunacies I have to say. Apparently the "value of women" is solely related to sex in your world. What, mamma didn't love you or something? To be honest anyone that would prefer to have sex with a machine rather than an attractive partner of the same species needs their heads examined, to say nothing of the universal availability of masturbation if you're that badly off.

      • Thats a fairly stunning collection of pig ignorant misogynistic lunacies I have to say. Apparently the "value of women" is solely related to sex in your world. What, mamma didn't love you or something? To be honest anyone that would prefer to have sex with a machine rather than an attractive partner of the same species needs their heads examined, to say nothing of the universal availability of masturbation if you're that badly off.

        I don't make the rules; the rules are that men pursue women for sex, women agree to stay with a man for security. This is how society is, and I cannot change that. The nash equilibrium for mating is already established and agreed upon by people far smarter than yourself or any of the oprah-ish magazines you subscribe to.

        Your strategy of groveling before women probably works for you. Stick with it. However, the acknowledged superior strategies for men are simply to amass power and influence to attract a mat

        • I don't make the rules; the rules are that men pursue women for sex, women agree to stay with a man for security.

          So that whole women entering the workplace thing has just breezed right by you eh? These are reprehensible sentiments - maybe you should learn to embrace and enjoy the pleasure women get from their own sexuality rather than being afraid of it and treating it as horse trading.

          • I don't make the rules; the rules are that men pursue women for sex, women agree to stay with a man for security.

            So that whole women entering the workplace thing has just breezed right by you eh? These are reprehensible sentiments - maybe you should learn to embrace and enjoy the pleasure women get from their own sexuality rather than being afraid of it and treating it as horse trading.

            Listen, I really do not make the rules - men and women evolved to have certain instincts and mating strategies that were beneficial to humans as a whole. These instincts aren't going to go away simply because you passed a law, you know. I welcome the freedom of women to do as they please, to be financially independent, to gain high-profile jobs and to use a primarily male mating strategy, because it works in my favour! It means I get to have sex with more different women, without having to provide for them

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by msobkow ( 48369 )

          Guess I'm abnormal. I value a good woman's companionship and friendship more than getting laid.

          • Who said that they're mutually exclusive? Anyway, I (and most people) can appreciate valuable companiship without sex, and sex without valuable companionship. However, when you are hooking up, *sex* is the reason why you do so - it's the biggest reason you are driven to pair up with someone, so if you value companionship and friendship more than you value sex, hook up with your mates instead.

            You hook up with a women because she can give you sex, and you try to get the other things (companionship and friends

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by msobkow ( 48369 )

              Let me get this straight. You're trying to tell me what my priorities are? Bwahahahahhahahah

              When I "hook up", it's mainly to have fun. If that sounds vague, it's because it is. Half the enjoyment comes from trying out things the other person is interested in that I haven't tried out before.

              The odds of having something in common with a guy is no higher than with a lady. In fact, I tend not to get along with "the guys" because I'm not into sports, I gave up beer-binging years ago, and I'm too old to

    • Re:Women have it hard in the future (Score:4, Interesting)

      by dkleinsc ( 563838 ) on Thursday October 13, 2011 @06:03AM (#37699680) Homepage

      If I'm looking for a long-term relationship, I expect Mary to put out by the third date or so, and if she doesn't, I'll find my long-term relationship with Susan, who *will* put out.

      Or, you know, I might realize that in any successful long-term relationship, there's a lot of factors that matter more than how quickly I can get my partner into bed. For instance, do I enjoy spending time with Mary? Do we have some common interests? Do we have good and meaningful conversations? Can we figure out a way of working when work needs to get done? If this relationship really does well, and we end up hitched for the rest of our lives, we're going to spend far more time dealing with that stuff than whether Mary put out on the third date.

      • If I'm looking for a long-term relationship, I expect Mary to put out by the third date or so, and if she doesn't, I'll find my long-term relationship with Susan, who *will* put out.

        Or, you know, I might realize that in any successful long-term relationship, there's a lot of factors that matter more than how quickly I can get my partner into bed. For instance, do I enjoy spending time with Mary? Do we have some common interests? Do we have good and meaningful conversations? Can we figure out a way of working when work needs to get done? If this relationship really does well, and we end up hitched for the rest of our lives, we're going to spend far more time dealing with that stuff than whether Mary put out on the third date.

        While that is all true, you're making the assumption that there is a difference between Mary and Susan in Marys favour. That is an unwarranted assumption (why not make it in Susans favour?). I'm making the assumption that, all other things being equal, I'd be with Susan if Mary doesn't put out quickly enough, because there is no reason for me to wait.

        Whether we like it or not, there is always mating competition (for both males and females); when a significant percentage of females are giving away what the o

        • Perhaps I'm thinking about this differently, based on 2 assumptions that I'm not sure you're making:
          1. I'm not going to date Mary while I'm dating Susan or vice versa. Maybe that makes me naive, but that seems to me to lead to a lot fewer complications if one or both relationships is successful.
          2. I'm not going to trust the rumor mill regarding what Mary and Susan will or won't do on which date. Among other things, people change: Maybe Mary has a reputation for being a prude but discovered a new side of her

        • You don't see how this ends well for females? How about, we don't need you. We're already at the point where we can perform random chromosomal assortment on eggs and generate synthetic sperm in mice; the process is there, it just needs refinement.

          And Darwinian sexual selection is still in play, you know - someone who's "putting out" on the third date is almost invariably going to be on birth control and will likely ditch you when your dickish behaviour is no longer compensated for by your dick, so your non-

          • You don't see how this ends well for females? How about, we don't need you. We're already at the point where we can perform random chromosomal assortment on eggs and generate synthetic sperm in mice; the process is there, it just needs refinement.

            And Darwinian sexual selection is still in play, you know - someone who's "putting out" on the third date is almost invariably going to be on birth control and will likely ditch you when your dickish behaviour is no longer compensated for by your dick, so your non-committal genes aren't getting passed on.

            You're an outlier; good luck trying to convince the rest of the women that they don't need to settle down with a man. In fact, the only studies I've seen that has measured womens happiness shows lower levels of happiness for modern women (40+). Men pursue sex. Convincing women to do the same when they never have done so in the past just results in lots of unhappy women.

    • switch "man" and "woman" in your comment and it still works. You are starting from the (very sexist) notion that a woman sells her body in return for safety and (financial) stability. Well I have news for you: Most parts of the world, women are better educated. They no longer NEED a man. My father still can't fry an egg, my late mother would never have been able to provide for her children. These days are long gone now. In my generation, women have sex because they feel like it, not as a part of a com

      • switch "man" and "woman" in your comment and it still works. You are starting from the (very sexist) notion that a woman sells her body in return for safety and (financial) stability. Well I have news for you: Most parts of the world, women are better educated. They no longer NEED a man. My father still can't fry an egg, my late mother would never have been able to provide for her children. These days are long gone now. In my generation, women have sex because they feel like it, not as a part of a commecial transaction. This explains the increase in divorces and single parent families. As Houllebecq said: the biggest mistake the feminists did was to teach men how to iron their own shirts.

        Instincts don't work like that - you don't conciously think "I need a provider", you just find the provider more attractive to settle down with. All the politically correct ignorance in the world isn't going to change biology. We find certain types attractive because of biology, not because someone said so. You should read up on this stuff (human mating strategies).

    • While you present a strong and coherent argument you leave out two very important facts. Who is this Susan? How do I get her number?

    • Prostitutes used to cost more than the median monthly wage,

      I don't see how that's possible, it can only be that the cheaper prostitues just weren't identified as such. If the median monthly wage is X your disposable income is going to be less than a quarter of X.

      I just don't believe that people saved up all their disposable income just to pay for a quick shag once every four months, and in the meantime spent no money on drinking, gambling, or other entertainment.

      • Well, it is possible because the median was so low compared to the high outliers. Hence, prostitutes were only for the very rich and powerful. The average man just didn't visit them.

    • I think it was Freakonomics that pointed out that the price of sex has dropped since the 30's. Prostitutes used to cost more than the median monthly wage, now they cost the price of a meal

      I'm gonna call bullshit on this one - because there has never been a single price for prostitutes any more than there is a single price for pretty much anything else.

      As to the rest of your arguments and replies... I'm gonna quote Buzz Lightyear, "you are one sad little man". One with some decidedly odd ideas about

    • Yes, of course there will be men who still want a real women, but you cannot escape the fact that demand is dropping.

      Yep...and you add in the benefits of NOT risking losing half your possessions every time you want to 'trade up' to a newer model. No listening to her bitch about you and your habits....never on the rag....not having to worry about knocking her up, and being stuck with her when all you wanted was to get laid a few times...etc.

      Yep, when they perfect virtual sex, or these robots...real women a

  • Yea, let's just not even go there.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by vadim_t ( 324782 )

      That's at most a catgirl, not furry enough [ebaumsworld.com].

      Though I don't know why people keep insisting on making creepy humanlike robots when they could just put it in a fursuit. There are plenty makers out there that make very good looking ones, even.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Khyber ( 864651 )

        In the end they all look like mascot suits. Very few body-tight ones, heads are always too big, eyes too large and creepy and pretty much dead.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by vadim_t ( 324782 )

          Some people make very good looking ones [deviantart.com]

          IMO the biggest advantage would be that realistic fur is much easier to do than realistic skin. Most people haven't seen anything besides cats and dogs from very close, so they'd find it hard to tell when something isn't accurate. Also, unlike with skin, on a cat a good part of what you see is dead, which makes things easier.

  • Talking to Machines [radiolab.org]

    The Robert Epstein segment still has me shaking my head a month later. It seems like for some men large breasts are the only reliable signal. Wake up guys. A B-cup is the French curve of aesthetic pleasure. With small adjustments of the gravity vector, it can become anything from a teardrop to a Tsarist onion, to say nothing of dynamic effects.

    But then, if you're a speech scientist and you can't tell the difference after a month of correspondence, I can see the merit in opting for

  • Almost as creepy as that guy who decided to make sex bots after losing a friend in 9/11.

  • QC's future is closer than people think.

  • Some weeks ago, the comic Questionable Content had a plotline involving a new and very humanoid "chassis" for one of the characters.

    http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1998 [questionablecontent.net]

    And now this news --- well to paraphrase Mark Twain: Reality does not replicate fiction, but it rhymes.

  • Let's see... (Score:3)

    by argStyopa ( 232550 ) on Thursday October 13, 2011 @06:04AM (#37699684) Journal

    - costs me thousands of dollars, check
    - will talk constantly, check
    - will never come across with a blowjob or sex, check.

    Yep, it's practically a real girl. At least this one comes with two positive aspects.
    1) the impossibility of sex is clear from the start
    2) I can terminate it or throw it in the trunk of my car without uncomfortable questions.

  • How is this anime? Because of the big eyes? I see no other reason to call it "anime robot girl". Could be an owl girl for all I can see.

    This is definitely not Valsione-R. It's even worse than a Fairlion. (super robot wars fans, any here?)

  • 7 Degrees of Freedom... (Score:3)

    by bryan1945 ( 301828 ) on Thursday October 13, 2011 @07:22AM (#37700116) Journal

    and 70 degrees of icky and "get me the hell out of here, now!"
    This and that 'Natural Girl' sex robot (or whatever it's called) scares even Cthulhu. What if the 2 mated?! Throw in Skynet and you could have a freakish anime-head sex robot killing machine.
    I'm going to crawl into a corner and have very bad dreams.

  • While this robot is passingly interesting in terms of more realistic human movement, I don't see where the "anime girlfriend" comes in. Somebody's projecting a little too much.

  • $300,000 for this toy? Is that a misprint?

    For that kind of money, I'd expect this thing to clean the house, cook dinner, mow the lawn, wash the car, and do the laundry.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Toze ( 1668155 )
      That's some high-value laundry washing, right there. I'd expect a little more out of it than housework, myself... but I've been watching a lot of GITS, so maybe I'm biased.

  • my subject says it all.

  • Sure, man can love a robot, no problem. Just have to build a robot that can do these things [marriagebuilders.com].
  • Didn't the mention of Firewire wake him yet?

Slashdot Top Deals

I cannot conceive that anybody will require multiplications at the rate of 40,000 or even 4,000 per hour ... -- F. H. Wales (1936)

Close