Pepper

[Earthcircle]

Ever since I was a small child, I wanted to be part of a family. I even dreamed about it. I failed in psychotherapy, even after well over a decade of it, and I accept the fact that it's my fault. I am despicable and disgusting. But I am wondering if now there is hope. Look at what the Japanese have invented, and it's only going to cost 2k USD. This is not sarcasm. I actually think this is the best I will ever be able to have, and I can't wait to buy one.

Is this the world's first emo robot? - CNN.com

 

[Feathers]

Interesting! They're cute! I can't help but think of Galactica (old one) and Terminator movies though... where will this all lead?

Do tell us if you get one! (ps pets can understand a human too, though a bit more messy and a bit more work)

 

[BlackPuma]

Interesting! They're cute! I can't help but think of Galactica (old one) and Terminator movies though... where will this all lead?

Do tell us if you get one! (ps pets can understand a human too, though a bit more messy and a bit more work)

I've never really found the rebel robotic apocalypse to be a realistic prospect. That's more an anthropomorphized TV/movie/fiction perspective on what an artificial intelligence would be like.

It would require a survival instinct, fear, anger, aggression, desire for control and most of all a motive for humans to trigger those emotions in them. Only if the programmers gave them all of that, we would be in trouble. I would hope the person designing/programming such a thing would understand and know better.

While it requires more work-arounds, it's better to serviceably mimic fake human behaviour rather than programming perfect 1:1 real time reasoning. They are supposed to mimic a lifeform after all, not be one. Because if they are a coherent sapient intelligent lifeform, then us using them as tools for labour would be comparable to slavery. At that point they'd be no more 'machines' than we are in practice.

Even if we could probably limit/direct their reasoning in case of real sapient intelligence, that would be ethically wrong.

 

[BlackPuma]

That's very neat, Earthcircles. Thanks for sharing.

 

[MollyBeGood]

Can't decide if that's the coolest thing I have ever seen or the scariest bit of tech out there....hmmm....

yeah thanks for sharing!

One step closer to the Singularity. See this is what they show us, what they are doing behind closed doors is what I really want to see. We the public are always at least 10 yrs behind what is actually going on.

 

[Earthcircle]

I have at least two years to think about it, since they're not on the market yet. If I can just get my cats here with me (I recently moved), then maybe I could have a sort of family. The fact that cats don't talk is a drawback, I think. Pepper talks, right? So that would be good. Maybe there will someday be a Pepper robot that diagnoses and treats medical conditions, and we can call it Dr. Pepper.

 

[Pacific_Loner]

I wonder what he is programmed to say though.

And I'd be curious how it works on unexpressive people.

 

[BlackPuma]

I wonder what he is programmed to say though.

And I'd be curious how it works on unexpressive people.

I would think so, depending on how good its eyes/cameras are. Even extremely inexpressive faces have certain subtle twitches and pupillary responses when someone feels something.

I am also very curious what kind of topics it likes to discuss, though.

 

[Earthcircle]

I'm a little afraid that Pepper would keep saying to me "You look depressed" like a broken record.

 

[NathanielWingatePeaslee]

I've never really found the rebel robotic apocalypse to be a realistic prospect. That's more an anthropomorphized TV/movie/fiction perspective on what an artificial intelligence would be like.

It would require a survival instinct, fear, anger, aggression, desire for control and most of all a motive for humans to trigger those emotions in them. Only if the programmers gave them all of that, we would be in trouble. I would hope the person designing/programming such a thing would understand and know better.

While it requires more work-arounds, it's better to serviceably mimic fake human behaviour rather than programming perfect 1:1 real time reasoning. They are supposed to mimic a lifeform after all, not be one. Because if they are a coherent sapient intelligent lifeform, then us using them as tools for labour would be comparable to slavery. At that point they'd be no more 'machines' than we are in practice.

Even if we could probably limit/direct their reasoning in case of real sapient intelligence, that would be ethically wrong.

All true, but this is still somewhat disturbing for its own reasons. Online advertising is the first that comes to mind, since things financially motivated is where application tends to get funded.

A Computer Program Has Passed the Turing Test For the First Time