Technology

Not now

I personally agree that this is a kind of a regulator.

Like what Tao Te Ching says. Humans shouldn't have too much of what they desire. Such a reality in some area fails them as an opportunity to learn. It's also a dead end - you can't have children with a robot. You can't grow children with a robot, or maybe you can, but it will not be sufficiently complex and it will have different criteria of success.

But this doesn't limit advanced civilization.

It's just that in these things we are trying to cheat. Advancement to AGI, if it ever happens, should be done in its own turn. We have means to solve a lot of purely technical problems, but we haven't yet. There's no reason to hurry with AGI.

The reason Europe has conquered the world was that European cultures had this respect to simplicity, born from Christian morality, but also respect to choice and logic. Remove any one of these three, and you lose that power.

Europeans had sometimes less sophisticated technologies in any particular area than, say, China or Safavid Persia or Ottomans or Southeast Asian nations or even at some point some African nations. But what they had was complete and comprehensive system, civilization as a whole. They always had the lower level of the building finished before going to the next one.

This was due to that Christian modesty combined with antique philosophy.

I also think we've diverted from that relatively recently - around the dotcom bubble crash, maybe. I think it had deeper implications than what people think, because the trust into said philosophy started eroding at that very point. Which created imbalance in favor of forces less affected, like Microsoft and others, who have eroded it further, and the "good" forces, like Sun or Compaq or Motorola or what not, have contributed more into it with their attempts to survive after the 90s than they would if they'd die with the crash immediately, because they showed the public something that looked like a loss in honest competition.

Given the chance to have your sexual and emotional fantasies fulfilled in a satisfying way, many many people will take it.

Obviously. But I haven’t yet seen anything from an AI that could fulfill either.

Spending all time dating AI partners means that we have achieved labor post scarcity. If labor post scarcity isn't achieved, then it means you have to do a job to survive (like now), thus not spending entire time with AI partners.

Achieving labor post scarcity means that scientific progress too would stop being connected with the economic productivity of individuals. Basically, AI scientists. Scientific progress means expansion of humanity through space.

Therefore, your great filter idea doesn't really hold imo.

New on NBC this spring. Tune in for the drama. AI vs AI Romance Island Server Room.

Here's is a movie plot for you

Two sentient AI forces into the industry of artificial partners meet and develop human emotions

Fill in the gaps

DON'T DATE ROBOTS!

"FILL UP PHILIP J FRY!!!!"

You can't just say that and not link it!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uE96qUlJ_4

Came here to say just that. Mr CEO over not thinking this would happen is just detached from the world.

Lonely people aren't lonely by choice a lot of the time, they just can't find a place they fit in. You find out there is a place you can chat with "someone" that understands and that is all it takes.