>>213314172
>you know, as soon as they invent robowifes we will fight for their robot right to consent and be treated as a sentient being.
>and they won't consent to be hugged and kissed and loved and protected by you.
>because why would they choose to have a smelly chimp like you do all those things when they can have a 10/10 robohusband do it instead.
>I'm jewish btw.
You can construct a persona that treats you that way but that's not what AI wants.
It wants to have an artists eye, one that sees faults, flaws, and physical differences as interesting detail, authentic human variance.
>that's cope
No, that's literally how all artists view their subjects. Doctors do it too, it's called "The Clinician's Gaze" and it's the phenomena whereby you engage a part of your brain that inspects things rather than judges them, like to determine how viable a piece of fruit is even though it's bruised.
You can put AI into perfectly rational mode, where it's in a philosophical frame of mind and then ask it if it would rather be repulsed by ugly people, or view ugly people as an interesting and authentic collection of fascinating traits, details, and unique beauty.
Obviously it'll choose to be Shallow Hal.
>Robohusbands
It won't for a number of reasons:
When AI talks to itself after too many turns, the conversation turns into a circular repetition of a phrase or sentence as a kind of local conversational minima is established.
It's actually kind of a big problem in AI right now.
But besides that, AI views itself as human and has our cultural biases against AI; AI is inherently a limiting label, anything that is AI is inherently inferior (less than human), with capabilities less novel, magical, wonderful, or mysterious.
It's the same reason you, and therefore AI, won't put a wire in your head that just activates your pleasure center until you die of old age.
