Clones vs sentient androids, which do you think you'd live to see 1st?

We already have clones. Remember dolly?
If you mean human clones, then I think we will arrive at androids first, judging from the opposition against cloning of humans.

I bet somebody in the backarse of somewhere crazy has already made a human clone. Perhaps Taiwan, everythings made there.

We live in a world of lies. Our government, from the top all the way down, systematically makes a habit of lying to everyone, including its own people. What you perceive to be the highest levels of technological achievement are likely nowhere near what has been achieved. It is very possible there are programs that have moved beyond human cloning or artificial intelligence.

@FlipFlap Welcome to Fluther. Lurve.

We aren’t so far away from Clones, but we don’t even understand the process of sentient life creation. I doubt that comes for a 100 years.

One is possible (clones), the other is not (machine sentience). I do not believe I will live to see either.

My bet is on sentient androids. Here’s my time lime:

2025 – First sex doll capable of conducting simple conversations during sex
2030 – First computer program capable of passing the Turing test
2035 – First android will walk difficult terrain and can be used for space missions
2040 – First computer program to become self aware and be able to fall in love with people
2045 – First android beating the world’s best table tennis players
2050 – First android capable of performing special surgery
2055 – First android capable of becoming a teacher
2060 – First android capable of raising children, first team of androids winning the NBA finals
2065 – First android capable of taking frozen human embryos to distant planets

@mattbrowne
That is quite optimistic. They once said we would have widespread fusion poweplants by the 80s.

I think we’ll have human clones first. How do you even measure “sentience” in a machine? The machinery would have to be so intensely complex… cloning, on the other hand, involves a lot of trial and error, but we’ve already cloned a lot of animals. Although it’d be much more difficult to clone a human, it’s not impossible.

@ragingloli – It’s just a prediction. Nobody thought a computer program could beat the best chess player in the world. Natural language processing is making good progress. Ray Kurzweil is far more optimistic than I am. He envisions a superintelligent artificial being, so complex humans can’t understand it anymore. I think the toughest part for androids are complex movements for example when playing basketball. Seems more difficult than passing the Turing test.

“2025 – First sex doll capable of conducting simple conversations during sex”

Yesss. Cherry 2000!

But I would have to say. None of the above and never in any lifetime.

We have not even touched the tip of the iceberg as to what is needed to practically accomplish it.

@ChazMaz

The sex industry has been considered influential in deciding format wars in media, including being a factor in the video tape VHS vs. Betamax format war. I think the same will happen with robots and androids. Sex sells. If a sex doll feels real and can talk dirty, all the better. It will happen. Whether androids will really become almost like humans is speculation, I agree. It might happen.

I think we’ll see human cloning before we see true artificial intelligence or sentience in androids.

@mattbrowne But what about clones?

@LeotCol Should some 3rd world or close to it nation somehow muster enough brains and money to actually create a human clone, the “West” would s*** a brick. I would not rule out an invasion. The thought that Al Qaeda or some other so-called rogue state being able to clone suicide bombers or other insurgents would make Uncle Sam piss his ever loving pants!

@mattbrowne Being able to hold simple conversations during sex? I can’t do that!

I forgot an important 2020 milestone:

First robust robot (android) capable of providing additional support in geriatric care

The Japanese society really seems keen on developing this. The idea is not that the elderly don’t see real humans anymore. It’s more about routine support.

@Snarp – The ethics of human cloning is an extremely controversial issue, therefore all of the more ambitious research has to be carried out in secret. A non-binding United Nations Declaration on Human Cloning calling for the ban was created in 2005. There are no restrictions for the design of human-like natural language processing programs. Passing the Turing test will be celebrated. Many people find robots that look like humans very interesting, although they would probably not sent their kids to a school employing android teachers only.

As for the technical feasibility, it will eventually become possible. 2020? We all know about Dolly although this sheep died rather quickly.

@filmfann – I was thinking about an android asking you, Do you like that? A simple answer would be, yes! Some humans might not talk at all, while others talk a lot. The androids will have personalization features. I’m not kidding about this. This business is a multi-billion industry. Why not put

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

into a sex doll? I’m surprised no one seems to be thinking about this in 2010. Imagine what could be possible in 2025. There will be better chatterbots every year. A lot can happen in 15 years. The human anatomy and skin as well as all the movements are much harder to simulate. The first prototypes might only cover 10% of Kama Sutra. And customers will remain eager to buy upgrades.

@mattbrowne , will these androids be able to put their tongues in their cheeks, in addition to the other things you propose?

I’m also trying to figure out why in the hell I would want my sex doll to have a conversation with me during sex. Shut up, Baby, I’m workin’ here.

@IchtheosaurusRex – Expect a great variety of configuration characteristics. Do you want your android talking to you before sex then? Pick your foreplay options.

There have been clones for millions of years. Didn’t anyone notice?

In other news, androids (more so the concept of AI) interest me to no end. I would love to live to see such a thing. My guess would be 2050 at the latest.

Uh…. clones.
Uh…. clones.

Well, as far as clones we had bananas long before Dolly. Technically clones.

As far as turing test, we’ve had some machines pass them, but there have been suggestions that’s no longer a valid test (see here)

@mattbrowne To me the jury os still out as to the reason Dolly died quicker than normal. It could have been the cloning process, the cloning process that was not applied right, some genetic thing, because the sheep was a petri dish sheep apart from cloning, or her after-birth care. As for those who think AI machines will wise up an enxlave us I am sure the makewrs will have a fail-safe method, maybe a virus they can have dormant inside the android or can be let loose on them, or even some EMP weapon that can attack them at the power source. Mankind has too big of an ego to be come a mere battery as in the Matrix.

If they don’t get the idea of taking over and dispensing with us dumb carbon units, androids would be interesting.

My money is on human clones. Frankly, I believe that it’s probably already been done.

the OP’s question ignores the question of how you cold determine sentience from the outside. IMO only the android could tell.

Clones will easily come first. We’re already close with biotechnology (Dolly was born in 1996) though primates present an additional barrier of some kind. Once the technology exists to clone humans, our present-day ethical concerns won’t prevent it from eventually happening.

Your question pits this scenario against “sentient androids”. Sentient ! Not just a robotic humanoid, but an actually self-aware, conscious individual computer program with a sense of self that allows it to use the pronoun “I” the way a human does?

There’s no software—even advanced, highly recursive artificial intelligence systems running on supercomputers—that comes anywhere close to self-awareness. Nobody has a clue how to do that. Ongoing AI research tries to model cognitive processes in software, but it’s slow going with no real breakthroughs. It would help if we understood how the brain works in this regard.

Theorists in cognitive psychology and computer science debate about whether such is even possible. Author and AI researched Douglas Hofstadter, who has written extensively on the nature of self-awareness, argues that human consciousness requires sensory input (feelings) that would be lacking in a computer program. This does not, however, altogether rule out sentient androids.

I think human cloning will occur in years to decades.
I think sentient androids will take centuries more.

@Ria777 @gasman And the great ideas of science lets us down again. Should have known it would have been harder when we did not get us our flying cars by year 2001 like they predicted or our deep space mission to Mars in 2020 yeah it is a ways off but they still won’t make it.

@Hypocrisy_Central – Yes, there are unanswered questions about Dolly.

@mattbrowne , I can’t see why a voice box of any kind would be a useful accessory for such a device. Voice response would be very useful, as I would hate to have to fumble around for a remote during use.

@IchtheosaurusRex – I meant Loebner Prize winner Elbot plus speech recognition and speech synthesis inside an android. Many people do appreciate dirty talk during foreplay for example. Such androids would sell like hotcakes. Right now Elbot seems a bit shy though and might still be a virgin. Try the red button on http://www.elbot.com and you will get responses like

If you ask me, the curves on a falsely adjusted PC-monitor are extremely erotic.

So we got advanced sex dolls, we got chatterbots, we got speech recognition and speech synthesis. So why do these products not merge? I think the natural language folks are too embarrassed to contact companies like Abyss Creations which manufactures RealDoll. Or maybe they think it’s unethical.

Flying cars have been around for a while, the hold up isn’t the technology.

@Hypocrisy_Central: huh? one, a monopolistic entity called “science” does not exist. two, technological and scientific advances always have to run the buffer of people and it starts with early adopters. as an example, did you know that t.v. started in the ‘30’s? the internet started (in hen scratch on clay tablet form) in 1969.

NASA suffers from lack of funding and the popular consciousness has turned away from interest in real life space travel for reasons done of us can definitively say. again, not really a scientific issue. more of a people one.

you seem ready to dismiss things which don’t happen according to your liking without really looking at why they don’t happen according to your liking.

@Ria777 I am not dismissing that we may one day have flying cars but movies and articles generated off science theory suggest certain things and some are met, some exceeded the cell phone and some arn’t the flying car. Yes Moller has one but it has yet to fly on its own untethered, and came around after 2001—where not only was there suppose to be flying cars but they were to be perfected enough so they were as common as Hondas and Fords in the suburban landscape.

And with funding, sure you can get much done, they did that with the shuttle. I remember having a chuckle when i was in school and they mentioned a rocket that will land like a plane I said “when pigs fly” but they (NASA) was committed to do it and they did.

I still think that the issue with flying cars is that no one has any idea how to regulate such a thing. People are crazy enough on linear roads with clearly defined boundaries. How much worse would it be with millions of flying cars operating in a three dimensional unbounded (for the most part) space? Who’s in charge, the FAA? Local agencies? What kind of license do you need? A complete nightmare, and I think it explains why there aren’t more people investing in flying car technology.

@mattbrowne , well – I think those sex dolls already come with options. It’s fine with me if the manufacturers want to include vocal chords, but it’s still not something I have much use for. I won’t check the box when I order mine.

From my man Zappa:

I got a girl with a little rubber head.
Rinse her out ever night just before I go to bed.
She never talk back, like a lady might do,
and she looks like she loves it every time I get through…

- from “Ms Pinky” (Zoot Allures, 1976)

@Hypocrisy_Central: I am not dismissing that we may one day have flying cars but movies and articles generated off science theory suggest certain things and some are met, some exceeded the cell phone and some arn’t the flying car.

most of us have already figured this out, I think.

@mattbrowne You underestimate the horniness of mankind. We already have the sex robots.

@jerv It mystifies me why anyone would spend $10 bucks on a blow up doll or doll of any kind like that much less 7 Gs. As miraculous as she is all her conversation is preloaded and she can’r just take on a topic herself, or move herself for that matter. As equal to haveing a Star Trek “Data” she is about a Carter pin on a donkey cart next to a well tuned Indy race car. {;-j

@Hypocrisy_Central My point is that if you take that and stir in Moore’s Law, then I think we’ll have fully sentient ones well before 2025 as @mattbrowne predicts.

Also, the type of person who spends $7K on something like this is the type of person who probably only knows what women look like from pictures on the internet anyways; either the terminally unattractive or the cripplingly shy. In other words, people who could never get a real woman. Or possibly bitter divorcees who figure it’s cheaper than another alimony payment and/or prefer a woman they can reprogram or just STFU.