Sex slave chat bots
Scholar Katherine Hayles says that Kismet was built as an ‘ecological whole’ to respond to both humans and the environment.
"The community," she writes, "understood as the robot plus its human interlocutors, is greater than the sum of its parts, because the robot’s design and programming have been created to optimise interactions with humans."Kismet’s creator Cynthia Breazal explains this through a telling example.
If someone comes too close to it, Kismet retracts its head as if to suggest that its personal space is being violated, or that it is shy.
In reality, it is trying to adjust its camera so that it can properly see whatever is in front of it.
)In a completely different vein, Janelle Monae’s 2018 e-motion picture represents humans as glitchy and unique, while ‘cleaned’ humans, also known as ‘computers’, are robotic automatons.
Monae’s character struggles to resist being programmed like a computer, and keeps trying to ‘remember’ her glitchy human self.
Ava in takes a darker turn, and goes from appearing to want to be accepted by humans to endangering people in order to preserve herself.
Both fembots transcend their sexualised identities to discover their own worlds.
My mother is neither a dog person nor a cat person, nor any kind of animal person — unless it is grilled and on a plate in front of her.In many bot films, human characters find themselves falling into another gap between human and machine: when the more–than–human-bot behaves as if the interactions with humans has meant nothing at all.Or else the bot suddenly appears stupid because it does not understand innuendo, sarcasm, or irony.But it is the human interacting with Kismet who interprets this retraction as the robot requiring its own space by moving back.Breazal says, "Human interpretation and response make the robot’s actions more meaningful than they otherwise would be."In other words, humans interpret Kismet’s social intelligence as ‘emotional intelligence’.