...Aiko sounds exactly like Martha Stewart? And what is that silly thing on her head?

The adroid can...

...", sort medications,"

As usual, Stanislaw Lem was there first.

Look at the computer you're using to read this. Think about what it cost, how much else it can do, how sophisticated it is. And how far behind the state-of-the-art it is.

Then consider the fact that just 60 years ago, the state-of-the-art in computers was this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ENIAC

What will androids be like in 60 years?

The real threat is that they'll take our jobs.

Sorry, folks, but this has been around a while. Read Ray Kurtzweil's _The Age of Spiritual Machines_ or even better, David Levy's '07 _Love + Sex With Robots_. The Canadian dude's a little behind the curve--check out this reposting of an anonymous article on the Ananova web site:

"A German inventor claims to have created the world's most sophisticated robot sex doll.

The sex androids developed by aircraft mechanic Michael Harriman from Nuremberg have 'hearts' that beat harder during sex.

They also breathe harder and have internal heaters to raise the body temperature - but their feet stay cold "just like in real life", according to Harriman.

He said: "They are almost impossible to distinguish from the real thing, but I am still developing improvements and I will only be happy when what I have is better than the real thing."

The dolls sold under the Andy brand name are on offer for £4,000 each for the basic model, with extra charges for adaptations like extra large breasts.

Underneath the silicon skin, developed for use in medical surgery, is an electronic heart that beats faster during sex.

The model can also be made to move by remote control, wiggling her hips under the bedclothes and making other suggestive movements - all at the touch of a button.

Harriman said his design was an improvement on the popular 'real dolls' sold in the USA."

And Sony is apparently going to bring back Aibo, the robot dog that really did help lonely old people tough it out, just like real dogs. Levy points out that most of us don't so much love others as much as we love what we project on the others. Sad, but how many times have you been a participant in "Oh, I never knew you liked ..." from a long-term husband/wife/partner?

Well, if she/it looks like Darryl Hannah in Blade Runner, sign me up!

are all women who use dildos "sociopaths"?

"Development and production of artificial human companions" is an important goal of the Church of Satan.

Not if the male robot is no more real-seeming than the female robot by the Canadian inventor. Most women don't use a vibrator to simulate a human being but to stimulate an orgasm. Since the purpose of a vibrator is not to simulate a human being in the first place, it can hardly fail on those terms. It can only fail on its lack of effectiveness as a vibrator compared to a more effective vibrator. The simulation of a human being generally takes place within the woman's imagination.

I wonder if that is why women still read novels much more frequently than men do. Novels engage the imagination and invite people to think the characters are real. However, fewer men these days read novels than in the past. It could simply mean that men's imaginative faculty is different in some way.

However, if men like the robot featured (or another maybe even more effective robot), I see nothing wrong with robots for sex.

I just want one that does housework. I seem to recall an old movie that had a shot of Cary Grant in a frilly apron. He was devastatingly sexy. When they get a Cary Grant robot that does dishes and can also whisper sweet words in my ear then I would be interested -- but only if the words varied. I suspect we each have our ideal sex robot. Human beings can be so difficult.

Yeah, the pink blouse is stupid, but c'mon, think broadly (no pun intended). We're moving towards interactive and lifelike robots. That is cool!

Why shouldn't we want to create robots who can do the dangerous or drudge-work jobs now performed by people? Shouldn't technology be used to make life better?

As for sex: it's weird, but please don't tell me that you women or gay men wouldn't seriously consider trying out a robot that looked and acted like Jude Law in "A.I." While I have no interest in having sex with a robot, if 5 years from now they rolled out the "Jennifer Connelly version C.O.,"* I'd probably buy the missus a weekend getaway and jump that thang's metal bones.

I agree that it's misguided to believe that masochistic or subservient-acting robots will stop men from raping or abusing women. As AKA pointed out, rape is about power, not sex. And I think that a socially awkward man might never get better if he expects real women to react like his little robotic love slave. On the other hand, it's a machine, and so long as it doesn't have feelings or is otherwise not sentient, who cares if some shy English professor keeps one in his study to play "Naughty schoolgirl gets a spanking" in his spare time? Have fun, folks!

*Career Opportunities

I get increasingly annoyed with this hostility toward "men who would bang an inanimate object," because it indicates such a profound failure of imagination or good faith attempt to understand the men who would want to.

Look, the reality is that some people put themselves out there and get no favorable attention from the opposite sex. (And for men, their odds decrease even more drastically if they don't want to have kids.) And yet, the biological desire for banging is as deep in us as the desire for pleasure itself.

And why shouldn't that individual get some pleasure? And why shouldn't it aesthetically please his/her sensibilities? Of course a real live human being would be infinitely more desirable, but for many people, that's just not an option.

I would find these write-ups much more fair-minded if they ended with "so where's the male version?," to indicate sympathy for all physically lonely people, rather than so hostile to those on the losing end of the attraction equation.

C'mon, Kate, get over being competitive and threatened, and imagine "artificial companionship" as a drastic potential improvement over no companionship at all. There are a lot of lonely mammals in the world, by unfortunate design, but that doesn't mean we should so glibly settle for it, or judge the losers for wanting to thrust their own hips once in a while and cuddle something larger than their cat to sleep.

As it is, this hostile refrain (and it's become one) indicates a coldness far more unsettling than any sex robot itself would aspire to provide. Maybe you should try five or ten years without any banging whatsoever and see if you might, paradoxically, warm up a bit.