Friday, August 18, 2006

Will technology revolutionize boinking?

When visionaries like Natasha Vita-More, an artist, futurist and transhumanist, look through mental telescopes, they talk about "neuromacrosensing" and millions of nanobots coursing "throughout the body communicating with different cells, sending signals to the brain so the whole body acts as a sensory communications system."

That ought to make sex feel pretty good, but you'll have to wait. Such things are a long way off. But other changes are coming much sooner. A few have already arrived.

(Via Aberrant News.)


Maybe one of the reasons we have yet to make irrefutable contact with extraterrestrials is because ET civilizations tend to reach a point of terminal decadence, an erotic cul-de-sac that precludes exploration. (Compare and contrast such an implosion to the "Singularity" too many of us are waiting for with bated breath.) Sufficiently advanced ETs might while away the millennia in a hedonistic stupor, brains (or their equivalent) melded to pleasure-generating devices.

It's even possible the pleasure-generating devices themselves may be the intelligences with whom we eventually establish contact.

22 comments:

W.M. Bear said...

At the risk of sounding like the old fart I probably am, a couple of points:

1) Here is an interesting quote from the article:

Earlier this month, Palatin Technologies announced that a trial of its new drug for post-menopausal female sexual dysfunction succeeded in rejuvenating desire in women who had little of it. The drug, a so-called melanocortin agonist, acts through the central nervous system. -- melanocortin AGONIST??? Boy, that sure sounds like a turn-on. But then, sex can be enough agony to maybe justify the name....

From which I conclude that:

2) Sex is overrated.

but

3) Maybe not all THAT overrated (see 4).

4) After skimming the article (the only way we O.F.'s read this sort of thing anyway), I decided that maybe, just maybe, there is some potential in VR sex provided the, er, joystick controls and feedback are appropriately modelled.

epikles said...

couple of other reasons maybe why - they may communicate in ways completely different that we cannot even begin to imagine, and, we tend underestimate the distances in space

Carol Maltby said...

Do you mean 'bated breath? ;)

I didn't know that "teledildonics" was Ted Nelson's word. His first wife has been a dear friend for many years, though I haven't yet met him.

I'd say that most people have barely learned how to begin to pay attention to their lovers' bodies, and without that foundation machines won't be able to improve on things, except in situations where physical contact is just not possible.

Katie said...

Maybe it's just me, but I find the use of any kind of artificial means for sexual satisfaction to be nothing more than clinical.

Not that they can't provide a temporary "fix".

But when you are with a partner that truly understands your wants and needs, and you in turn do everything that you can to return the favor, the results are much more satisfying than anything that some made up means could provide.

To me, there is nothing more special than that total contact that you get from someone that truly knows what you desire, and is more than willing to explore that with you, and vice versa.

Never in my experience will any kind of machination be able to provide for me what the simple touch of someone you truly love can.

I guess I'm a bit of a hopeless romantic that way.

Mac said...

Never in my experience will any kind of machination be able to provide for me what the simple touch of someone you truly love can.

I'm with you -- for the time-being. But what are humans, after all, but very complex meat-based machines?

Katie said...

I'm with you -- for the time-being. But what are humans, after all, but very complex meat-based machines?

But we're meat based machines with thoughts and feelings. That's always been what sets us apart. To think otherwise is just being pessimistic.

Mac said...

But we're meat based machines with thoughts and feelings. That's always been what sets us apart.

For now. If three pounds of meat and assorted chemicals can produce thoughts and feelings, I don't see why the feat can't be duplicated -- or even improved upon -- by different materials. Sentience is a remarkable gift, but I don't think for a second that it's exclusively human.

To think otherwise is just being pessimistic.

Why "pessimistic?" Because it troubles you that we may not be as special as we sometimes seem to be? I welcome a future where there's more thinking and feeling.

Katie said...

Why "pessimistic?" Because it troubles you that we may not be as special as we sometimes seem to be? I welcome a future where there's more thinking and feeling.

If such a thing may eventually be possible, then I agree...why not? But as it stands, what we are right now is all that we've got, and we'd be better off making use of it than pining away for something else.

Man, I get philosophical when I've had too much to drink, don't I? ;o)

Mac said...

But as it stands, what we are right now is all that we've got, and we'd be better off making use of it than pining away for something else.

Now that I agree with. In fact, it's my core gripe with the hardcore Singularity crowd.

Katie said...

Sometimes living in the "here and now" isn't such a bad thing.

Mac said...

Sometimes living in the "here and now" isn't such a bad thing.

Not at all. (My personal definition of the "here and now" encompasses the future that "now" inevitably becomes, but I read you.)

W.M. Bear said...

But when you are with a partner that truly understands your wants and needs, and you in turn do everything that you can to return the favor, the results are much more satisfying than anything that some made up means could provide.

Quite frankly, I've never had an erotic partner who truly met this "standard" and I've been in close intimate relationships with a fair number. I think the problem for men especially may be that we're afraid to say what we really like for fear of putting our partner off while at the same time bending over backwards (sometimes literally!) to give our partner exactly what SHE wants. (Dinner? Sure thing!) And so sex can all too easily turn into asymmetric warfare. (Hence my "agony" comment; hence my current O.F. status.)

Katie said...

I think the problem for men especially may be that we're afraid to say what we really like for fear of putting our partner off while at the same time bending over backwards (sometimes literally!) to give our partner exactly what SHE wants.

See, this sounds to me like you're blaming the women in your life for not fulfilling your needs to your expectations. This strikes me as being somewhat unfair. Not all women are fragile creatures that balk at experimentation, and if you treat them as such, you're doing them (and yourself) a great disservice.

Mac said...

Holy shit! My blog has become "Dr. Phil"! ;-)

Katie said...

Sorry Mac. :)

Mac said...

No, no -- keep it coming!

Paul Kimball said...

Jezzie:

Sometimes living in the "here and now" isn't such a bad thing.

Bingo!

As those immortal Canadian poets Trooper said:

"We're here for a good time, not a long time, so have a good time, the sun can't shine everyday."

Paul Kimball said...

W.M. Bear:

And so sex can all too easily turn into asymmetric warfare.

Alas, for me it's the equivalent of the 1939-1940 Phoney War.

Seems like I've been waiting to be blitzkreiged for years now!! :-)

Paul

Paul Kimball said...

Fembots.

That's what we need.

Lots of fembots.

:-)

Paul

Carol Maltby said...

With all the guys who can't tell a clit from a chicken neck, no wonder we go for things with batteries. Besides, they rotate better than any of you could possibly do. :)

Mac said...

OK, it *was* "Dr. Phil." Now it's "Jerry Springer"!

Katie said...

Patience and training, Carol. Patience and training. Oh, and I guess a little communication thrown in helps too. ;)

What? It worked for me. :)