Will sweet sexy sexbots and “carnally-neutral industrial robots” unite to destroy civilization? Woman-hating “pickup artist” and wannabe white supremacist philosopher-king Heartiste says yes.
Heartiste, as long-time readers here may vaguely recall, has been obsessed with sexbots for some time. In the past he seemed most excited by the possibility that pliable and bendy sexy robot lady slaves could render all but the hottest flesh-and-blood ladies obsolete. Or at the very least force sub-par ladies to be less picky about who they have sex with.
Now Heartiste thinks that sexbots might just herald the end of civilization — at least in conjunction with the decidedly-non sexy worker robots who will be terkin all er jerbs.
Mr. H hasn’t really updated his thinking on the sexbot portion of the coming robot revolution.
The biggest impact will be a reduction in the asking price of women (in normie terms: a lot of sub-hottie women will have to date below their league if they don’t want to be alone). Sexbots, and other realistic simulacra of sex with a hot woman, will occupy the attention and, ahem, energy of a mass of omega and beta males who will prefer the intense experience of release with their Minka Kelly lookalike bots over uninspiring sex with the human plain janes and fatties who would normally be their lot.
Well, at least until they realize they need to clean their new robot companions.
What sexbots and VR tech (yolodecks) will essentially create is a massive unemployment crisis among Western women. These castaways will struggle to find love and marriage (which is a woman’s prime purpose in life).
Says you.
Meanwhile, “omega males and those marginal rejects on the left hand side of the beta male curve” will take themselves out of the
sexual market … content to wile away their recreational time (by then almost all their time) in the uncannily supple bosoms of their sexbots.
Meanwhile, cool dude alphas — the kind of man Heartiste likes to think he is — will end up with vast harems of desperate hotties.
“Alpha males won’t have to worry about sexbots,” Heartiste promises.
[F]or them, the sexbot revolution will create a pornucopia of delights as they are besieged by desperate women who literally can’t find a man because three quarters of them are locked in their bedrooms completely satiated from week-long sessions with their Ivanka Trumpbots. Slender hot babes will still have a real man to call their own….as long as they’re ok with him calling additional women his own.
A douchebag can dream, huh?
Oh, sure, the ladies will eventually have sexbots too, but it may take longer, as “lonely women will want them mostly for romantic pillow talk, intuitive understanding, and household chores.”
Heartiste is apparently unaware that women already have a vast array of mechanical sex toys to choose from, and that “pillow talk” is not very high on most lady sex-toy purchasers’ list of priorities.
So the sexbot revolution seems like great news for Heartiste and his allegedly alpha fanboys, right? Not so fast, because there will also be robots doing things that don’t involve penises at all.
[T]he mass immigration of robots into the job market will place more downward pressure on the wages of blue collar men and in most cases drive them completely out of work, with no hope of new market niches opening up that don’t require high IQ and educational attainment to realistically enter.
And then the jerb-terkin robots will invade our offices.
“[C]arnally-neutral industrial robots will move into pink collar and even some white collar occupations,” he warns.
In fifty years, robots will be doing accounting, legal, administrative, HR, data entry, reporting, and maybe even programming jobs.
And don’t think retraining will allow anyone who’s not a certified genius to keep up with the robot usurpers.
As robots take over ever more low-, mid-, and high-skill jobs, the humans formerly employed in those jobs simply won’t have the IQ horsepower or suitable temperament to adequately retrain themselves …
The ones who will be spared the negative externalities of the robot and sexbot revolutions will be those whose creativity, fluid intelligence, spontaneity, and incomparable sexuality can’t be sufficiently mimicked by artificial substitutes.
Sorry to have to break it to you, Heartiste, but you aren’t going to find a lot of people like that in the manosphere.
So what happens after the robots terk almost all the jerbs? Heartiste sees two possibilities: economic armageddon, or Wall-E world.
In the first scenario, jobless Westerners will have no money to buy anything, which will lead to “sexbots rotting on the shelves.”
Or perhaps we’ll all end up like the future fatties of Wall-E world,
all needs catered and pleasures serviced by round-the-clock robots and sexbots, as we get fatter, weaker, stupider, lazier, more feminized, and less rebellious toward the disappearance of meaning from our lives.
Heartiste thinks economic collapse will be more likely.
Robots will herald financial collapse from debt spending and money printing. Sexbots will herald fertility collapse from marriage abandonment and a mass exodus of men and women from the dating scene. Literally, currency and seed will be spilled fruitlessly into an empty abyss.
Try to get that image out of your head.
But there is still hope, Heartiste insists, and it comes in the form of TRUMP!
The people who voted for Trump, in their unarticulated way, are the first angsty salvos against this coming collision. Nationalism, race, and family are the only bulwarks that can stop the dystopian juggernaut, and that’s why the elite are in a frenzy to stump what Trump represents.
If the choice is between a robot-triggered economic armageddon and Trump-world, well, let’s just say that I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords and ladies.
@ Paradoxical Intention
I was trying to find that gif last night! Her boobs actually helicopter around and switch places.
@misophistry:
I agree with you entirely: the experience of shopping in a shop such as the one you work in will not be recreated by robots any time soon.
There are so many things that can’t be done by the 1970s and now 2017 wet dream of the automated shop:
What about the person who drops their change under the automated checkout while they are trying to pay for their shop? (yeah, i’ve done that).
What about the person who doesn’t quite have the money to pay for the things she obviously desperately needs but the shopkeeper knows she’ll come back and pay it the next day?
What about the person who thought they dropped their keys in your shop but didn’t?
What about shopkeepers who have a local, clued-in understanding of how customers will react to certain events? That isn’t something that AIs are going to beat you at anytime soon; the world’s infatuation with big data will certainly erode your clients but will not replace you. At least, I hope not.
DIY shops are another good example of AI not making the grade anytime soon.
When I go into those shops I’m not looking for a specific kind of bolt, I’m dragging in a bloody great bit of something and demanding to know how it can be attached, given my ridiculously specific needs, to something equally stupid. Stat.
Or I’m asking for one of those hook things I can’t remember the name of but it fixes like [gesture] and won’t fall off even if that bastard latsot does the thing he always does with his fucking coats….
As someone who has worked in AI-related fields since the 90s, I reckon this kind of thing isn’t going to happen for decades. Instead we’ll get things like checkouts that can (poorly) understand our intentions via terrible speech recognition. AIs at point of use or sale will get better, but figuring out what people want to do outside buying that tube of extra strong mints will take longer.
‘But really, why should humans do mind numbing and/or physically taxing drudge work when machines can do it instead?’
Because it’s cheaper for the employers. Contrary to what most people think, to common sense and to our sense of what’s right, the jobs that get automated are ones that were formerly well-paid craft or union jobs with labour forces that knew their own worth. If this doesn’t sound right to you, think about why we don’t yet have automated clothes-making machines.
As an engineer the most challenging and interesting part of my job is helping clients decide what they want—if we can get that right (and the vast majority of engineers can’t) the actual building part is easy.
I’ve been involved in the non-sex-bot ‘bot industry for a looonnnggggg time, now, and I’m not seeing H’s apocalypse. There have been a lot of jobs taken over by robots (more properly by “automation”), and the refrain “they don’t take breaks, don’t take vacations and don’t form unions…” is troubling. In the industrialized nations, the rise in use of automation has more to do with accuracy and repeatability than with fringe benefits. The coffee-bot and burger-bot are likely a ways off, and I have NO IDEA where the man-o-sphereans get the idea that a sentient sexy-bot is only a christmas season away… the closest I’ve seen (and, full disclosure, I don’t really research that end of the industry) is nothing more than an anthropomorphic lump of silicon with the a voice chip that is the New Millennium equivalent of1960’s Chatty Cathy doll.
Still, I take umbrage at the dismissal of industrial robotics as “carnally neutral”….
You can’t know non-personal sexual gratification until you’ve had a “waldo-job” from a Kuka Robotics Agilus Sexx (sixx… SIXX) robot… “the FASTEST robot on Earth”!!!
@Alan, I love your dog. He has a very sober and serious demeanour, and very compassionate, but maybe a little too sad for clients. Perfect as a judge in youth criminal court, I think.
@latsot:
Amen to that. True in any profession that analyzes needs and structure complex solutions, probably. An architect said pretty much the same thing to me about her work.
And communication is key, as you say. A lot of lawyers are happier impressing their clients than communicating with them. Sigh.
Meat lawyers! I love it! I think the best and most brilliant reason for meat lawyers is the flood of legal assistance that poured into airports in response to the Muslim bans. Knee-jerk, full-on real-time meatself commitment, putting their best skills at the service of the rule of law, and our shared humanity. I wasn’t there; I’m in another country. But I am so proud of my American colleagues.
This. This. This.
And furthermore, I want to go to a shop where I won’t get sneered at and talked down to because I don’t happen to know the technical term for a particular widget I might buy once in a blue moon (I don’t sneer at people who don’t know something I do – if anything, I tend to get excited about explaining it to them).
@latsot
You’re quite right. I should have said “Net neutrality could (should) be a recognized legally as a human right” or something like that. Meaning the law has not yet caught up on that one.
As a son-of-a-lawyer, I had it drilled into me that unless you want your estate to be eaten up by legal costs after you die, you don’t want to die intestate. I therefore found it quite embarrassing that for a long time I could not talk my wife, who has a very substantial estate (home, stock portfolio, rental property) into making a will. She tried to tell me that I should “research” the subject, write her a will, and then she would take that to a lawyer. I kept arguing that the lawyer’s job is to help her figure out what she wants to do with her estate, then — the easy part — put it into the form and language that has been established over the centuries in our state. Maybe you could automate the latter part, but I don’t see the process of deciding what you want to do and what legal means are available to do it can be replaced by AI any time in the near future.
The point is that the language of wills has been established by centuries of case law. If you say something in your own words, you risk having a court decide that you meant something quite different from what you intended. Some of that probably could be done by software, but it would have to be a very sophisticated program on the input side — i.e., the design of the questions that would be posed to the user. And how do you decide whether, say, a revocable trust is right for you? You might be able to program a computer to decide whether it might or might not be good for you — to eliminate the clearly inappropriate situations — but the question of whether it is right for you, given your financial and family situation and the rules in your jurisdiction, is one that I doubt could be automated.
She finally did agree to have a will drawn up by a lawyer friend from her chorale group, and it was far less painful and less expensive than she feared, so she now has a proper will, and I can die in an unembarrassed state (at least about that issue).
Weighing in from the medical field, and specifically medical documentation, which has been my area of expertise for decades now.
The technology exists now for doctors and allied health professionals (catch-all term for nurses, PAs, etc.) to enter all their notes via speech recognition. All doctors and AHP do not use speech rec. Either they don’t want to buy it, or they don’t want to take the time to train the program to recognize their idiosyncracies, or they have a strong accent that makes it harder for front-end speech rec (that is, a speech rec program that can turn your speech into written words) to function. That’s why medical transcriptionists are still around, though these days they edit more back-end speech rec (cleaning up whatever speech rec did with a dictator’s voice file) than they did 20-30 years ago.
There are other techs that doctors and AHP use that don’t involve an MT cleaning up after them, but a lot of them use techs where the doctors/AHP have to clean up after themselves – another case where sometimes they’d just as soon have an MT do the cleanup.
All of which is a long way for me to say that even with the strides I’ve seen since my time in the industry, it ain’t perfect. Health information documentation is a ways off from being fully automated, and medical records are easy to automate, relatively speaking.
Another reason customer service probably won’t automate any time soon is that people want to talk to a meat employee. At least the readily available option of a meat employee. IME, self-checkouts at retail stores aren’t the most popular option; at least one grocery chain has removed their self-checkouts in my area and gone back to 10-items-or-less express lanes with human cashiers.
Also, some types of retail stores aren’t very automate-able; hobby-type stores (art supplies, craft and fabric, hardware, etc.) attract a lot people who need advice (and often encouragement) as much as they need supplies.
Even when automated retail truly becomes a thing, it will still take a fair few decades to phase out most of the meat-associates as the consumers who are comfortable (i.e. born into their use) with automation slowly outnumber the oldsters who insist on personal service.
@ latsot;
🙂 🙂
I wanted to come back to this because of the “figuratvely speaking” part of being willing to sacrifice their life. What the fuck does that even mean? Like, you’ll totally write fanfics where you give your life to save her? You’ll totally step in the way of something about to hit her as long as its soft and relatively slow moving? Oh wait, I know what they mean. What they really mean is “I won’t pull my women in front of me to use as a human body shield, mostly because I would never be involved with a women who could possibly be big enough to stop a bullet.”
That anime boob gif is hypnotizing…
@ Schnookums;
That does get to the meat of the discussion regarding the man-o-spherian social order… women cannot be allowed to have any agency whatsoever or the man-o-sphereian can’t make this demand without taking the chance that the woman will just leave.
Yeah, that’s what you do for those you care about… hedge that bet as much as possible. The manbabies have been crying forever about how they’re always having to give their lives for ungrateful women (in wars, in dangerous occupations, by dying from heart attacks and other illnesses, even by … wait for it… hunting mammoths), but when questioned about their intent… they were only kidding.
The poster quote for the mindset comes from the christian (Greek, Pauline) bible, where John sez:
Ever the man-o-spherian, he goes on to say in the next line:
@PI
That anime boob gif… I can’t stop watching…
Even though I’m similarly endowed and the parts of my brain involved with my neck, back, and shoulders is curled up in a corner somewhere and screaming. Maybe that’s why I can’t stop watching. Oh dear god…
*whiiiine*
@ lysistrata
Sassy was a lady, in every sense. She’s now chasing squirrels in the sky (sniffle) but that’s about the only photo where she does look a bit dignified. Normally she looks like this:
http://i.imgur.com/HcNaoaE.jpg
Aaaaah. What a lovely dog.
@ latsot
For nearly two years now I’ve been establishing a fake Facebook profile for someone for reasons you’ll probably understand. It’s quite interesting as it happens. I have given her appalling taste in music though, which she’s less happy about. (There’s sort of a legit reason for that though; beyond the fact it’s funny)
I like the idea of a post scarcity future where we can quit our drudge jobs but right now the tories are in charge round here and they can manufacture scarcity if there isn’t enough to go round. I think they’d rather starve us than admit the possibility of an unconditional citizens income. So I keep the job. It’s not so bad and I’m close to the food supply!
@Alan,
You sure you’re sourcing your quote right?
If you are, the whole internet is wrong, AGAIN.
Also, Sassy looks like she has a human arm growing out of her butt to grab her front leg. The weird ways that photos go sometimes…
Dear, Sexbot Scientists
Don’t make em look like celebrities. You will, you can’t help yourselves. You make sextoys that, allegedly, mimic the vaginae of pornstars. It’s gonna happen. But, like, ewww…
@ boo
A quick Google suggests it might be a quote he ascribed to one of his characters. He was embroiled in a series of lawsuits throughout his life though so he may be reflecting personal experience.
I detached a number of items from Sas’s backside over the years. Never a human arm though, mainly brambles. She once did turn up with a cow’s front leg in her mouth. And whenever she came back with something after one of her swimming sessions in the Thames I would find myself muttering “Please don’t be a body part”
Sassy is my sweetheart’s landlord’s dog, who we took care of over the holidays.
Tiny little thing — barely bigger than my cats — but totally comfortable outside in -40 weather, or happily bouncing through the snow-covered tundra and working her way up 2′ snowdrifts that were four times her height.
Back to the skills discussion: for a junior position, the hard thing is figuring out how to do the thing.
For a senior position, your skills were all honed for years on how to do the thing. But you delegate that to the junior employees because your value is now all in figuring out *what* thing to do.
This I’ve seen be true in undergrad versus grad school; in grad school/postdoc versus prof (though I didn’t quite get there); and in software consulting.
(Maybe I’m a bit bitter my junior employee gets to do the fun stuff while I sign the contracts and analyze the requirements.)
Lysistrata:
That’s one thing I’ve learned over the past couple years. My company went back to our original lawyer after signing up with a lawyer who was all bluster (and who had an OK deal).