It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
However it is still a symptom not a persuasion when a person prefers computerized woman - or men - to the real thing, a symptom of a society that is no longer functional or built around it's people but which has been gobbled up by corporate interests and unless someone in power see's and interprets these warning signs' for what they are it will inevitably lead to societal collapse because a society that no longer functions at all level's is no society at all.
I mean what is wrong with palm olive and a good imagination to let off that steam do they really have to plug themselves in?. Seriously messed up stuff.
LGBT rights to 'Digisexuals
A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
One question that I have is if someone else's sex bot rapes, molests, or sexual harasses me; who would be at fault? The sexbot? The owner? Or the programmer?
Robosexual is a term to describe people (or sentient robots, if technology ever advances that far) who are sexually and/or emotionally attached to robots. Generally, the robots to which robosexuals are attracted are humanoid.
Like some other sexual orientations, robosexuality only goes in one direction: from human to robot. This is because robots are still a long way from sentience, and because even if a person were in a hypothetical relationship with a hypothetically sentient robot, that robot would not be robosexual towards the person, since robosexuality is exclusively an attraction towards robots (and not humans such as the hypothetical human in question).