THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Comic Discussion => QUESTIONABLE CONTENT => Topic started by: BenRG on 04 Feb 2018, 14:27

Title: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: BenRG on 04 Feb 2018, 14:27
Jeph isn't the sort of guy to do a Valentine's Day special strip or arc but, if he was, which canon couple would you like to see featured? Or how would you like him to subvert the whole thing?

Whilst I would love to have a totally silent four-panel with Steve and Cossette (just to maximise the troll), if I really had to give my favourite option, both for comedic and characterisation reasons, I'd like for the singletons to get together to flip the day the bird and declare how happy they are to be single. Naturally, as the night progresses, they all start becoming rather bitter about the state of affairs of their personal lives and may inadvertently give clues about who they'd prefer to be with that night.

Okay, so I'm a frustrated romcom writer. :-P

Let me know what you want to see!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: War Sparrow on 04 Feb 2018, 16:45
I'd like Sven to come back.
 Hanging out with his intern, reading, having a lovely discussion with Jimbo that leads to a concept album about lesbian werewolf ranchers rescuing their little town from an evil developer vampire zombie.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: blt on 04 Feb 2018, 17:12
Isn't Valentine's Day next week?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Tova on 04 Feb 2018, 17:17
Incurable!  :lol:

I picked Jim/Veronica/Sam because I would quite like to see them again some time soon.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Gyrre on 04 Feb 2018, 18:36
I'd like Sven to come back.
 Hanging out with his intern, reading, having a lovely discussion with Jimbo that leads to a concept album about lesbian werewolf ranchers rescuing their little town from an evil developer vampire zombie.

Would Sven be the sort to eat black noodles on Singles Awarness Day?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Gyrre on 04 Feb 2018, 18:38
Those are some tough choices.

Wouldn't Brun be invited to the 'contently single party' by one of the two individuals in denial?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SpanielBear on 04 Feb 2018, 19:31
Comic!


God-dammit Jeph. I love you, but another week of this? The forums cannae take it!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: TRenn on 04 Feb 2018, 19:39
Well, this ship tease is going to be in transit for a while. it has far too much comedic potential to be resolved any time soon.

Hopefully Bubbles' 'blush stickers" have been properly serviced, they're going to get a lot of use for a while.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: TheEvilDog on 04 Feb 2018, 19:44
*Grabs some popcorn and sits back to await the fireworks on the forum*
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Rincewind on 04 Feb 2018, 19:47
That fourth panel is just full of "aaaaawwwwwwwww!" With a side of Squeeee!

Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SmilingCat on 04 Feb 2018, 20:16
Faye blush!

I have a theory that Faye is partially unsure with her feelings because she hasn't come to the realization that romantic love doesn't necessarily have to come with  sexual attraction.

God-dammit Jeph. I love you, but another week of this? The forums cannae take it!

Drag it out another five hundred strips, Jeph, their tears will sustain you!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: A small perverse otter on 04 Feb 2018, 20:16
Oh, boy. You just had to go there, didn't you, Jeph? You'd gotten the whole forum in line, and you just had to launch a tweet-stormcomic like that.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: War Sparrow on 04 Feb 2018, 20:49
I'd like Sven to come back.
 Hanging out with his intern, reading, having a lovely discussion with Jimbo that leads to a concept album about lesbian werewolf ranchers rescuing their little town from an evil developer vampire zombie.

Would Sven be the sort to eat black noodles on Singles Awarness Day?

Sven is actually so deep into his novel on Viking trade routes he's missed the whole holiday.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: brasca on 04 Feb 2018, 21:45
I voted for option 3 since all of the others are couples and thus not single.

And it’s nice to see Faye blush even if it’s once for every 10 times Bubbles does it.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: A small perverse otter on 04 Feb 2018, 21:47
Singles Awareness Day falls on Ash Wednesday this year, so everybody will be so busy recovering from their Mardi Gras blowouts the night before that they won't care about whether they're coupled or not.

(On non-leap years when Ash Wednesday is Singles Awareness Day, Easter falls on April Fool's Day. Draw whatever conclusions you like from that.)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: shanejayell on 04 Feb 2018, 21:54
AWWWWWW.

Yeah, Faye, one of these days Bubbles is just gonna explode.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Loki on 04 Feb 2018, 22:48
Personally, I just want to see Sara happy with the allosaur.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: BenRG on 04 Feb 2018, 23:17
Today's strip supports my theory that we missed something during the time skip - Specifically Faye becoming more tactile with Bubbles because, as Bubbles once pointed out, humans tend to do physical contact to reassure friends. What this meant was that Faye actually didn't notice when her touching became more intimate and emotionally loaded (I think that Bubbles holding her face when Spookybot offered their help was the boundary marker). However she does feel those emotions and attraction. I just think that it's her self-esteem issues and her unwillingness to push Bubbles into something for which she may not be ready is holding her back.

Panels 3-5 in today's strip seem to suggest that Faye and Bubbles are at the 'hug and draw strength from each other so often that they don't notice it' stage. I also think that Faye is just teetering on the precipice where she doesn't really know what the thinks or feels about any of this anymore.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: poofdepoof on 04 Feb 2018, 23:29
I know everyone's talking about how Jeph is going to tease this out &c &c but... I feel like Jeph is actually fairly generous about payoffs. I feel like the cogs are starting to turn in Faye's head... And now that the forum poll mentions it, I'm wondering if Valentine's day will actually help the matter.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Near Lurker on 04 Feb 2018, 23:36
Dammit, Faye.  You're too smart to be this oblivious.  At least recognize what's not happening.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: anahata on 05 Feb 2018, 00:29
I think Faye has just recognized it. The blush says it all.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Cornelius on 05 Feb 2018, 00:40
Well, mutual blushing: perhaps they are both indeed content to leave it at this for the moment.

Drag it out another five hundred strips, Jeph, their tears will sustain you!

A ship needs to float on something, you know.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: gopher on 05 Feb 2018, 03:42
We get it. Bubbles is attracted to Faye, and Faye doesn't quite realise it. Switch to another plotline, please.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: BenRG on 05 Feb 2018, 03:45
We get it. Bubbles is attracted to Faye, and Faye doesn't quite realise it. Switch to another plotline, please.

I think that today's strip takes things one more step. This is Jeph confirming that Faye feels something strong about Bubbles and, at this point, is either not thinking about it or doesn't know what to think about it.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: traroth on 05 Feb 2018, 04:39
Ok, I was wrong. It's still cool. They are so cute, in today's comic...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Pennepasta on 05 Feb 2018, 04:52
We get it. Bubbles is attracted to Faye, and Faye doesn't quite realise it. Switch to another plotline, please.

I think that today's strip takes things one more step. This is Jeph confirming that Faye feels something strong about Bubbles and, at this point, is either not thinking about it or doesn't know what to think about it.

I agree there. Feels very like the Clinton/Elliot strip where they were being all cutesy, and then Elliot let on later that he was attracted to Clinton. Flip knows *quite* which strip that was, though :P
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ckridge on 05 Feb 2018, 05:04
I'm solidly aboard ship, but today's strip irritated me at first. I thought initially that Faye was being jerked out of character to tease readers. I could see no plausible way she could have moved so quickly from mere friendliness to compliments and hugging. After consideration, though, I think it makes narrative sense.

If you go back and read the last five strips together, they show movement toward greater intimacy. Faye asks searching questions. Bubbles answers them even though clearly embarrassed. Faye comforts her embarrassment by petting her. Bubbles responds with her own searching question, thereby showing that she is seeking intimacy too, not merely enduring it. Answering the question, Faye realizes that she has had no desire for anyone else since she took up with Bubbles, and is content with this.  And thus, sweet talk and hugging. Conversations like this are the mental equivalent of sex. They do not necessarily lead to physical sex, any more than affectionate touching does, but they put sex near by.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ckridge on 05 Feb 2018, 08:18
As to Singles Awareness Day, I would like a one-shot of Hannelore off in the world somewhere, solving differential equations, repairing satellites, disassembling, cleaning, and reassembling a stove, flying a wingsuit, conversing with an itinerant on a Greyhound bus, talking with Station on the phone, cleaning a zendo, climbing a mountain, or whatever it is that she is doing to get her feet more solidly under her.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: JoeCovenant on 05 Feb 2018, 09:59

Can I just say...

I was totally unaware of Singles Awareness day...!

Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: oddtail on 05 Feb 2018, 10:04

Can I just say...

I was totally unaware of Singles Awareness day...!

We need a Singles Awareness Day Awareness Day!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SpanielBear on 05 Feb 2018, 10:54

Can I just say...

I was totally unaware of Singles Awareness day...!

We need a Singles Awareness Day Awareness Day!

So long as it doesn't fall on Infinite Recursion Awareness Day, that should be fine.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: TinPenguin on 05 Feb 2018, 10:59
I believe it typically falls on the Feast Day of Cyril and Methodius, for those unlucky enough to have no bro to create transformative new writing systems with.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Mr. Skawronska on 05 Feb 2018, 16:30
Other: May "trying her feminine wiles" on a human.  Hilarity ensues.  Pintsize gets jealous.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Zelia on 05 Feb 2018, 16:56
Long time reader (since 2008 I think), new poster because there's an angle here I'm not sure people are considering. This relationship between Faye and Bubbles is the first intimate, asexual, non-romantic partnership between any characters in this strip, the first queerplatonic relationship. While some people are calling for a resolution to perceived romantic tension, and other's just want Jeph to change focus for a while, I find their relationship refreshing. All too often in literature the very important friendships in people's lives, the sorts of friendships that are true partnerships, are treated as second-string to romantic and sexual relationships. Even though Bubbles may be interested in romance to some extent, she's clearly happy with the partnership she has, and may be willing to leave behind her romantic interest forever to sustain that relationship. Even romantically inclined people can be perfectly happy without romance in their lives. There doesn't need to be a resolution. And I'm happy to continue watching their friendship as they feel out their personal boundaries. This is what queerplatonic relationships are all about, that personal definition of what works and what doesn't for the people involved.

I'd actually be disappointed if Jeph decided to quickly veer this off into romance or sex. It's interesting as it is.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ckridge on 05 Feb 2018, 17:05
Hi, Zelia.  I, too, am happy to see the present growth of trust and intimacy between Faye and Bubbles go on for a long time. I think romantic love is one of the highest possible human states, but this gradual opening is beautiful to see and good in itself, not merely as a route to something else.

I must differ about this being the first intimate, asexual, non-romantic partnership in the strip, though. Such relationships are the rule between humans and AnthroPCs. Pintsize and Marten, Hannelore and Winston, and Marigold and Momo all have such relationships.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: evilbabyorphanage on 05 Feb 2018, 17:10

Can I just say...

I was totally unaware of Singles Awareness day...!

We need a Singles Awareness Day Awareness Day!

So long as it doesn't fall on Infinite Recursion Awareness Day, that should be fine.

Doesn't everything fall on Infinite Recursion Awareness Day?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Gyrre on 05 Feb 2018, 17:37
Singles Awareness Day falls on Ash Wednesday this year, so everybody will be so busy recovering from their Mardi Gras blowouts the night before that they won't care about whether they're coupled or not.

(On non-leap years when Ash Wednesday is Singles Awareness Day, Easter falls on April Fool's Day. Draw whatever conclusions you like from that.)
General poor planning on the part of the Roman Catholic church, I'd say. Christmas should be in September after all.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Gyrre on 05 Feb 2018, 17:41
Dammit, Faye.  You're too smart to be this oblivious.  At least recognize what's not happening.

Smart people can be plenty oblivious. Trust me.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Thrudd on 05 Feb 2018, 17:53
Dammit, Faye.  You're too smart to be this oblivious.  At least recognize what's not happening.
Smart people can be plenty oblivious. Trust me.
Well it may be that so many points were put into knowledge skills that there were none left over for non-verbal communication.
For some it is trying to communicate with a squid - even if the signals are obvious there is no clue on what is meant outside of generalities at best.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 05 Feb 2018, 18:16
Quote from: Zelia
While some people are calling for a resolution to perceived romantic tension, and other's just want Jeph to change focus for a while, I find their relationship refreshing.

Welcome, not-exactly-new person!

I too would consider it good art to show a relationship like what Faye and Bubbles have as a success. "Refreshing" is just the right word.

I worry that they are both products of the world they grew up in and got their ideas from. If they've watched too many romantic comedies, for example, their hidden assumptions will interfere with their discovery and development of a queerplatonic relationship.

Which, let's note, is a kind of relationship more likely to benefit both of them than a conventional sexual one.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: jwhouk on 05 Feb 2018, 18:35

Can I just say...

I was totally unaware of Singles Awareness day...!

We need a Singles Awareness Day Awareness Day!

So long as it doesn't fall on Infinite Recursion Awareness Day, that should be fine.

Doesn't everything fall on Infinite Recursion Awareness Day?

Or is it nothing? I can never remember.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Perfectly Reasonable on 05 Feb 2018, 20:09
Personally, I just want to see Sara happy with the allosaur.

They are obviously meant for one another.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: TheEvilDog on 05 Feb 2018, 20:11
Personally, I just want to see Sara happy with the allosaur.

They are obviously meant for one another.

That point doesn't have a leg to stand on.

(Just like Sara)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: MamiyaOtaru on 05 Feb 2018, 20:30
whoa!  a new dude character
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Neko_Ali on 05 Feb 2018, 20:34
oh no... It's happening... With Hannelore's extended absence, Claire's floof is becoming lonely and restless. It seeks to add others to it's mass by any means necessary. THE FLOOFENING HAS BEGUN!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Gyrre on 05 Feb 2018, 21:02
oh no... It's happening... With Hannelore's extended absence, Claire's floof is becoming lonely and restless. It seeks to add others to it's mass by any means necessary. THE FLOOFENING HAS BEGUN!
Well, at least it's not a semi-hypnotic beard.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Tova on 05 Feb 2018, 21:05
SHENANIGANS

I like the mirrored body language in panel one.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: BarGamer on 05 Feb 2018, 21:21
Off the top of MY head, they should either disassemble Pintsize, or call Hanners. Off the top of Claire's head, go with the scissors.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: TheEvilDog on 05 Feb 2018, 21:46
Well obviously things can't keep going on like this. Things are getting way too crazy and someone is going to get hurt. One of them is going to have to go.

Marten, pack a bag, you're staying at Steve's until you find a new place.

Or maybe hang out with Hanners.

Whichever works.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Mad Cat on 05 Feb 2018, 21:59
"poor decision-making skills"

… on WHOSE part?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: TV4Fun on 05 Feb 2018, 22:01
Wow, Marten and Claire have really been Demoted to Extra (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DemotedToExtra).
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: BenRG on 05 Feb 2018, 23:06
Today we are reminded of something about which it is easy to forget: Claire's hair is a distinct if symbiotic life-form and it is HUNGRY. It nearly bit off Marten's tongue the first time he kissed the top of Claire's head and we all remember how Emily nearly lost her hands to this creature! What Pintsize thought he was doing tempting the beast is beyond my imagination!

Seriously, though I actually think that there was a message to Faye and Bubbles in today's strip: Neither of you live a normal life; don't expect any present or future part of it to be normal and/or predictable!

SHENANIGANS

Actually, 'Noodle Incident'.

I like the mirrored body language in panel one.

That was deliberate, IMHO. Either Bubbles is unconsciously imprinting 'normal behaviour' from Faye or Jeph is playing around with the 'they're already acting like a couple' concept.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: oeoek on 06 Feb 2018, 00:03
The floof files, part one.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: JoeCovenant on 06 Feb 2018, 02:17
Personally, I just want to see Sara happy with the allosaur.

They are obviously meant for one another.

Some might argue that Faye and Bubbles are obliviously meant for one another...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Sullivan on 06 Feb 2018, 02:26
Off the top of MY head, they should either disassemble Pintsize, or call Hanners. Off the top of Claire's head, go with the scissors.
Disassembling Pintsize: Marigold knows (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1413) how to do that. A good ploy for getting her back into the story!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Zebediah on 06 Feb 2018, 03:32
We don’t need Marigold to disassemble Pintsize any more. There are two experienced robot repair technicians living in that apartment.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Sullivan on 06 Feb 2018, 05:04
Pfah. "Need" is such a strict criterion.

Anyway, Marigold has recent experience at the job!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Cornelius on 06 Feb 2018, 05:39
I distinctly remember Marten having disassembled Pintsize due to  the cake mix incident, early on. But perhaps that was before his current chassis.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 06 Feb 2018, 06:41
"Contained-field magnetics" is apparently easy to take apart and put back together.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: shanejayell on 06 Feb 2018, 07:04
 :-D :laugh:

On one hand I'd suggest em-pulsing Pintsize to pop him apart and get him loose.

On the other, might PTSD Bubbles...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: jwhouk on 06 Feb 2018, 08:26
"poor decision-making skills"

… on WHOSE part?

Yes.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: brasca on 06 Feb 2018, 10:42
Today we are reminded of something about which it is easy to forget: Claire's hair is a distinct if symbiotic life-form and it is HUNGRY. It nearly bit off Marten's tongue the first time he kissed the top of Claire's head and we all remember how Emily nearly lost her hands to this creature! What Pintsize thought he was doing tempting the beast is beyond my imagination!

Seriously, though I actually think that there was a message to Faye and Bubbles in today's strip: Neither of you live a normal life; don't expect any present or future part of it to be normal and/or predictable!

Agreed.  Although it’s nice to come home to old familiar irritations.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: swapna on 06 Feb 2018, 15:35
Long time reader (since 2008 I think), new poster because there's an angle here I'm not sure people are considering. This relationship between Faye and Bubbles is the first intimate, asexual, non-romantic partnership between any characters in this strip, the first queerplatonic relationship. While some people are calling for a resolution to perceived romantic tension, and other's just want Jeph to change focus for a while, I find their relationship refreshing. All too often in literature the very important friendships in people's lives, the sorts of friendships that are true partnerships, are treated as second-string to romantic and sexual relationships. Even though Bubbles may be interested in romance to some extent, she's clearly happy with the partnership she has, and may be willing to leave behind her romantic interest forever to sustain that relationship. Even romantically inclined people can be perfectly happy without romance in their lives. There doesn't need to be a resolution. And I'm happy to continue watching their friendship as they feel out their personal boundaries. This is what queerplatonic relationships are all about, that personal definition of what works and what doesn't for the people involved.

I'd actually be disappointed if Jeph decided to quickly veer this off into romance or sex. It's interesting as it is.

@ckridge already pointed out that this kind of relationship is the norm between AnthroPCs and their companions. There are a lot of best friend pairs that don't have any kind of romance in between (Marigold/Hanners, for example). The best example might be Faye/Marten: even though it started out with romance, they have been best friends through several relationships, through really ugly times and the good. Exactly the kind of relationship you were describing - intimate, meaningful and committed.

What we didn't already have are people who are questioning their sexuality. The only person who came out later in life is Marten's dad, and we only meet him when all that's said and done.
Faye may be bi but hasn't figured it out yet, and it would be fun to see her explore that.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 06 Feb 2018, 18:41
All true but Bubbles and Faye strike me as showing a kind of intimacy that Marigold and Hannelore did not.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: BillGuy on 06 Feb 2018, 19:08
"Contained-field magnetics" is apparently easy to take apart and put back together.
Comic 464-465 for those playing at home. (http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=464)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: A small perverse otter on 06 Feb 2018, 20:28
We don’t need Marigold to disassemble Pintsize any more. There are two experienced robot repair technicians living in that apartment.
Yes, but would they take him apart in such a way that he could be put back together again? And, if so, would they actually do so?

I think that waiting for Marigold might be a better choice, after all.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Penquin47 on 06 Feb 2018, 21:21
Oh no, poor Bubbles!  I'm surprised we didn't see the fweeeeeeeeeeeeee again!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SpanielBear on 06 Feb 2018, 21:33
Oh no, poor Bubbles!  I'm surprised we didn't see the fweeeeeeeeeeeeee again!

She may need to reload.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ImVeryAngryItsNotButter on 06 Feb 2018, 21:38
Quote from: Jeph Jacques
I am torturing Bubbles

No, you're torturing your fanbase.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: brasca on 06 Feb 2018, 21:47
I know Bubbles lost a lot of her memories, but I'd think she'd remember enough communal living in basic training to not be embarrassed by this. 
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Loki on 06 Feb 2018, 21:54
We don’t need Marigold to disassemble Pintsize any more. There are two experienced robot repair technicians living in that apartment.
Yes, but would they take him apart in such a way that he could be put back together again? And, if so, would they actually do so?

Would you need all of the King's knights to put him back together again?

Okay, discussion point.

It is incumbent upon Bubbles in this situation to say something along the lines of "seeing you half-naked is not a strictly platonic experience for me, as you seem to assume"? (Sorry for the awkward wording, I just woke up.)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Somebody on 06 Feb 2018, 21:56
I know Bubbles lost a lot of her memories, but I'd think she'd remember enough communal living in basic training to not be embarrassed by this.
Also, she & her two-tone skin walk around naked all the time. Double standards...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Shjade on 06 Feb 2018, 21:57
I know Bubbles lost a lot of her memories, but I'd think she'd remember enough communal living in basic training to not be embarrassed by this. 

I don't think the skin exposure is, itself, the cause for her reaction here, brasca, but rather the person to whom said skin belongs.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 06 Feb 2018, 22:31
It's an open question why synthetics care about human nudity.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: BenRG on 06 Feb 2018, 23:14
That was a surprisingly innocent chuckle of a strip. It is something that I could have imagined seeing in a comedic-themed comic book.

What I think we are seeing here is that Bubbles is discovering the nature of sexual attraction. What we also see (and I think this is interesting) is that Faye isn't oblivious, rather she is actively in denial about Bubbles's reaction to her. She hasn't yet worked out that Bubbles is attracted to her and is assuming that her reaction is prudishness rather than anything else.

Oh, and now we know that Bubbles is into Faye's legs in a big way!

Oh no, poor Bubbles!  I'm surprised we didn't see the fweeeeeeeeeeeeee again!

We have. Look carefully around Bubbles' neck on panel 3!

It's an open question why synthetics care about human nudity.

It's partially social normalisation for those residing in anthropomimetic chassis, I think. Humans have a nudity taboo and they mimic it. However, in Bubbles' specific case, it's because she finds the body in question attractive and she's struggling against lots of weird reactions and urges.


[EDIT - Fix'd typo]
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Bollthorn on 06 Feb 2018, 23:28
Stop torturing poor Bubbles you meanie.

Also daaaaayum Faye be thicc :3
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Gyrre on 06 Feb 2018, 23:48
I know Bubbles lost a lot of her memories, but I'd think she'd remember enough communal living in basic training to not be embarrassed by this.
Also, she & her two-tone skin walk around naked all the time. Double standards...
The darker portion is confirmed by Jeph to be a sort of unitard.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 06 Feb 2018, 23:55
Quote
it's because she finds the body in question attractive and she's struggling against lots of weird reactions and urges.
I _do_ wonder which weird reactions and, especially, urges AI has here. Do somebody installed hormonal system in her body and made a setup to link AI core to said system?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Near Lurker on 07 Feb 2018, 00:16
The darker portion is confirmed by Jeph to be a sort of unitard.

Speaking of which, I'm now pretty sure Faye's wearing panties, but my first thought (especially with Bubbles' line leading me to think she wasn't) was that we were seeing a bit of mons.  Did anyone else get that impression?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: anahata on 07 Feb 2018, 00:37

It is incumbent upon Bubbles in this situation to say something along the lines of "seeing you half-naked is not a strictly platonic experience for me, as you seem to assume"? (Sorry for the awkward wording, I just woke up.)

Awkward wording is typical of Bubbles, so that looks quite authentic.

But would Bubbles give away that much about her feelings? She's usually quite cautious about what she says.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: WoaLG on 07 Feb 2018, 00:46
So what's the betting pool that this ship will either sail or sink on February 14th?

(I hate that word, but I'm not sure what else to call it in this case.)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: BenRG on 07 Feb 2018, 01:23
Quote
it's because she finds the body in question attractive and she's struggling against lots of weird reactions and urges.

I _do_ wonder which weird reactions and, especially, urges AI has here. Do somebody installed hormonal system in her body and made a setup to link AI core to said system?

It is clear that there is some characteristic of Chatham-type AIs (much like Smart AIs in the Halo universe) that they mimic human brain-patterns in the development of friendships, personal emotional bonds and even sexual attraction. This is not hormonal as they don't have a hormonal system or even an analogue thereof. Rather, it seems to be some aspect of their personality algorithms that makes them seek emotional connections with others and, possibly through mimicry of humans around them, this sometimes expresses itself as sexual attraction.

Whilst it is unlikely that they have an instinctual reproductive drive, they do seem to subconsciously understand that sex is one of the deepest expressions of intimacy possible and that seems to manifest itself as reacting strongly to the appropriate imagery or experiences that match their attraction preferences.

So what's the betting pool that this ship will either sail or sink on February 14th?

I don't think so; my feeling is that Jeph is moving the arc forward to the point where Faye recognises that there is some kind of thing happening between her and Bubbles and going no further than that immediately. I'm wondering if we'll reach that point this Friday, actually. From what he's said on Twitter, the next arc will be Emily-centric and I expect that next week.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 07 Feb 2018, 01:56
Quote
It is clear that there is some characteristic of Chatham-type AIs (much like Smart AIs in the Halo universe) that they mimic human brain-patterns in the development of friendships, personal emotional bonds and even sexual attraction. This is not hormonal as they don't have a hormonal system or even an analogue thereof. Rather, it seems to be some aspect of their personality algorithms that makes them seek emotional connections with others and, possibly through mimicry of humans around them, this sometimes expresses itself as sexual attraction.
Sure. But it's a very complicated problem. Sorry for overanalysing the joke, by the way.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: BenRG on 07 Feb 2018, 02:06
I think that you're getting too deep into the whys and wherefores Aenno. All Jeph has to do is be internally consistent to his own universe. He is not obliged to make what he portrays in his work consistent to how real work AI would work.

FWIW, in the Halo universe, because they are directly derived from real human synaptic patterns, AIs subconsciously 'fill in the gaps' by creating in themselves reaction patterns that are analogous to attraction. So, they don't need any biological basis for it, they are 'psychosomatically' responding to what their intelligence algorithm insists ought to be there.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: jwhouk on 07 Feb 2018, 02:29
It is suggested that this is the case with Officer Basilik, at least with her feet.

Sent from my NXA8QC116 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Near Lurker on 07 Feb 2018, 02:30
Also, someone has to say it:

"I am decent.  I also happen to be naked."
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 07 Feb 2018, 02:37
It is suggested that this is the case with Officer Basilik, at least with her feet.
Thing is, upload technology was directly declared as noexistent in QC (at least yet). This AIs aren't copies of humans.
At least if there is no some kind of spooky conspiracy.

I think that you're getting too deep into the whys and wherefores Aenno. All Jeph has to do is be internally consistent to his own universe. He is not obliged to make what he portrays in his work consistent to how real work AI would work.

FWIW, in the Halo universe, because they are directly derived from real human synaptic patterns, AIs subconsciously 'fill in the gaps' by creating in themselves reaction patterns that are analogous to attraction. So, they don't need any biological basis for it, they are 'psychosomatically' responding to what their intelligence algorithm insists ought to be there.
That's why I said sorry for overanalyzing the joke. :) I still believe it's intresting question, but I don't want to derail thread.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: JoeCovenant on 07 Feb 2018, 02:40
Also, someone has to say it:

"I am decent.  I also happen to be naked."

"Decent? I'm gorram SPLENDID!"
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Case on 07 Feb 2018, 03:39
Negligent flash-boobery in the first degree - the problem society dare not name ...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SinusPi on 07 Feb 2018, 04:00
Negligent... or negligeent? C'mon, surely that was coming.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Marco on 07 Feb 2018, 05:13
Quote
...so very concept of sexual arousing, especially human sexual arousing, is alien for them.

Try to explain this to May or Pintsize.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: yaksaregreat on 07 Feb 2018, 05:35
On the latest strip, 3673, Bubbles is freaking out about Faye's butt, but I can see her underwear peeking out???
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 07 Feb 2018, 05:53
Quote from: BenRG
Faye isn't oblivious, rather she is actively in denial about Bubbles's reaction to her.

I believe this.

Do you think Faye is also in denial about her own budding and unclear feelings toward Bubbles?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ckridge on 07 Feb 2018, 06:49
This is probably funnier if it hasn't happened to you. It did to me once, with a girl I was crushing on and had no business to be crushing on, and I would see her every time I blinked for a week or so. It was better than repeatedly dropping a hammer on your toe but worse than tinnitus. The terrible thing is that it can mean utterly nothing more than that the woman in question feels comfortable around you because you don't register as a sexual object at all.

Bubbles is brave when it comes to enduring pain, though a coward when it comes to speaking her heart, so she will probably just suck it up. I would be so out of there. "No, I'm fine, I just feel like sleeping on the sidewalk tonight and every night forever. I can jury-rig a plug out of the base of a lamp-post. My dosimeter has gone black. A couple of more doses of butt-rays, and valentine-shaped tumors will seed themselves all through my body."
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: shanejayell on 07 Feb 2018, 07:01
 :-D :laugh: :lol:

Jeph ids ADMITTING he's torturing poor Bubbles. Ha.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: TheBiscuit on 07 Feb 2018, 07:08
On the latest strip, 3673, Bubbles is freaking out about Faye's butt, but I can see her underwear peeking out???
Various kinds of panties exist which show off large amounts of butt. Thong style, for example. Bubbles may still be seeing enough to drive her a little crazy, even if it isn't quite the 'full moon'.

All that said, I would have expected Bubbles to enjoy the view and remain silent.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: BenRG on 07 Feb 2018, 07:15
All that said, I would have expected Bubbles to enjoy the view and remain silent.

That's not Bubbles, though, is it? She's a full-on lawful-good paladin-type personality. If Faye appeared before her naked, her most likely reaction would be to grab a towel, cover her up and usher her into her bedroom so she could get dressed whilst Bubbles guarded the door!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ckridge on 07 Feb 2018, 07:21
I don't think it possible to over-analyze how AIs can desire humans. (Or anything else, for that matter. There is no over-thinking, only sometimes under-acting.) What we are really doing when we do that is trying to imagine what Bubbles is feeling.

First off, we have to keep in mind that AIs who consort with humans are a self-selected group who like to talk and make friends. We know, from a throwaway joke, that some tried to consort with dolphins, and that this did not work as well. There are likely a great many AIs for whom humans are a peripheral concern. Bubbles, by contrast, is naturally inclined toward friendship.

Second, Bubbles is bereaved, bereft of her memory of bereavement, and trying to make friends again anyway. She is risking much more than any of the other AIs, and so is bringing a much more intense mixture of fear, desire, and determination to the table.

Third, Bubbles has grown up immersed in our culture, in which sex and romance are continually upheld as heaven on earth, because they just about are, and because they can be used to sell you just about anything.

Fourth, Bubbles in particular must have some way of gearing up suddenly from everyday life into combat mode. It would be absurdly wasteful to have her continually able to knock down walls and overturn armored vehicles, and would lead to accidents every time she got distracted. She must have some set of systems that do the same work that adrenaline and the related stress hormones do in humans, and arouse her body to its full capacities.

Much has been made of how close human fear-and-flight arousal is to human sexual arousal, particularly in the shy and inexperienced. The mouth goes dry, the hands get shaky, the skin flushes or grows pale, the heart stumbles and pounds, one feels hot, and so on. We have seen something like this happen when Bubbles vents coolant.

So, I suspect that what is happening here is that Bubbles is being slain by Faye's beauty, just as one of us might be slain by beauty, because we all learned how to do that from the same books and movies. At the same time, I think, her body is furiously preparing itself for some emergency, with utterly no notion of what the emergency might be. We can't know just what that feels like, because we don't have bodies anything like hers, but it is likely profoundly moving and neither entirely pleasant nor entirely unpleasant.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 07 Feb 2018, 10:56
Try to explain this to May or Pintsize.
None of them had an arc based on being sexualy aroused by a human and trying to deal with it. Also Pintsize or May are exactly that kind of persons who would emulate sexual arousing (or, even more likely, just declaring they have sexual arousing) to pester people around.

So, I suspect that what is happening here is that Bubbles is being slain by Faye's beauty, just as one of us might be slain by beauty, because we all learned how to do that from the same books and movies. At the same time, I think, her body is furiously preparing itself for some emergency, with utterly no notion of what the emergency might be. We can't know just what that feels like, because we don't have bodies anything like hers, but it is likely profoundly moving and neither entirely pleasant nor entirely unpleasant.
So you're saying about scenario like this: Bubbles feels attraction from, let's say, platonic reasons, as AI persons are modeled after humans culturally; her body detecting such attraction as a generic stress and activating generic mobilisation protocols.
That's entirely plausible when we're speaking about animal, who have body reactions created evolutionary, and before concious minds. But why on Earth Bubbles' chassis would do (and even allowed to do) this kind of things autonomously without Bubbles control?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Neko_Ali on 07 Feb 2018, 11:07
Because antropc bodies have specifically been designed to simulate human reactions. Or at least passing similarities. The in universe reasoning probably  has something to do with allowing them to closely interact with humans in a way that humans are used to, to better foster human-android relations. The real reason is because Jeph wants them to react in ways similar to humans to better telegraph their emotions to us. Someone like Pintsize or Jeremy, either his old assembly arm or current more humanoid form lack these sorts of reactions so it's harder at a glance for use to identify their emotional state, meaning it has to be spelled out.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 07 Feb 2018, 11:24
Because antropc bodies have specifically been designed to simulate human reactions. Or at least passing similarities. The in universe reasoning probably  has something to do with allowing them to closely interact with humans in a way that humans are used to, to better foster human-android relations. The real reason is because Jeph wants them to react in ways similar to humans to better telegraph their emotions to us. Someone like Pintsize or Jeremy, either his old assembly arm or current more humanoid form lack these sorts of reactions so it's harder at a glance for use to identify their emotional state, meaning it has to be spelled out.
And the question I'm trying to ask is - is it conscious effort from AI side, and what happens if we move Bubbles' mind into toaster?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ckridge on 07 Feb 2018, 11:54
Bubble's body responds without conscious control for the same reason our bodies do: consciousness is slow. I can only speculate about what consciousness is for, but it reviews action rather than initiating it. Running action past a review function, especially one as multi-purpose and sub-optimized as consciousness, is slow. So, as soon as bodies register severe stress, they automatically slam on the general emergency mode, inform the mind that they are good to go, and ask where to go.

[There is a heartbreaking moment in Peter Watts's novel Blindsight in which a soldier who controls a squad of insensate robot killers goes off to die as a rearguard. You know she is dead when her robots all suddenly speed up. They are much more efficient when no longer reviewed by a consciousness; only now there is nothing left with which you could ever possibly make peace.]

I would say that Bubbles feels attraction for romantic, not Platonic reasons. That is, she leads from the mind rather than the groin, but not because she detects the pure form of the Good in the other person, as Plato would have it, but because she feels something more like this:

Your two eyes will suddenly kill me. I am unable to endure their beauty, so keen is the wound that they make in my heart, and without the quick reassurance of your voice to heal this wound whilst it is fresh.

Your two eyes will suddenly kill me. I am unable to endure their beauty.

Upon my word, I tell you sincerely that you preside over my life and my death like a queen, and when I die, the truth of this shall be seen.

Your two eyes will suddenly kill me. I am unable to endure their beauty, so keen is the wound that they make in my heart.


  -- Geoffrey Chaucer, Merciles Beaute I, prose translation by Richard Scott-Robinson
original here: http://www.bartleby.com/101/12.html

Only, in this case, perhaps not exactly eyes. 
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ckridge on 07 Feb 2018, 12:03
And the question I'm trying to ask is - is it conscious effort from AI side, and what happens if we move Bubbles' mind into toaster?

Out of her explosively responsive warrior body, Bubbles might not suffer quite so much, but she would have to work just as hard not to play the fool. Once you are locked into a sociocultural psychosexual matrix, it is not easy to get out, because as far as you can tell, that is just who you are.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 07 Feb 2018, 12:35
As I'm intrested about this topic, I'm afraid it's kinda off-topic. Is it ok if I'd create separate thread about it?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: haikupoet on 07 Feb 2018, 12:41
I think that you're getting too deep into the whys and wherefores Aenno. All Jeph has to do is be internally consistent to his own universe. He is not obliged to make what he portrays in his work consistent to how real work AI would work.

FWIW, in the Halo universe, because they are directly derived from real human synaptic patterns, AIs subconsciously 'fill in the gaps' by creating in themselves reaction patterns that are analogous to attraction. So, they don't need any biological basis for it, they are 'psychosomatically' responding to what their intelligence algorithm insists ought to be there.

That's pretty much the only sensible reason for Cortana's increasing sexiness over the course of the games - she's in love with Master Chief and made herself hotter the longer she was with him.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ckridge on 07 Feb 2018, 12:42
Is it off-topic? Talking about Bubbles's feelings seems to me to be relevant to a strip about Bubbles's feelings. It would irritate the hell out of her if she knew we were discussing her in this academic, abstract fashion, but we aren't in the same universe as her. It doesn't seem likely that any other AIs are listening in. That being the case, I don't see why we shouldn't.

Moderators?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: TheEvilDog on 07 Feb 2018, 13:22
Because antropc bodies have specifically been designed to simulate human reactions. Or at least passing similarities. The in universe reasoning probably  has something to do with allowing them to closely interact with humans in a way that humans are used to, to better foster human-android relations. The real reason is because Jeph wants them to react in ways similar to humans to better telegraph their emotions to us. Someone like Pintsize or Jeremy, either his old assembly arm or current more humanoid form lack these sorts of reactions so it's harder at a glance for use to identify their emotional state, meaning it has to be spelled out.
And the question I'm trying to ask is - is it conscious effort from AI side, and what happens if we move Bubbles' mind into toaster?

Bear in mind as well that one of the prominent theories regarding potential Human-AI relations is that of the Uncanny Valley and would possibly be a guiding one in the creation of humanoid AnthroPCs.

The closer to human that something becomes, the more receptive people are in dealing with them. But there comes a point where something gets so humanlike that it starts to scare people and so they react negatively towards it.

To put it this way with the following representing the keypoints of the theory's line.
- Wall-E is considered cute even if its not even vaguely humanoid, but it is expressive through its use of its eyes.
- Robbie the Robot from the film Forbidden Planet is a perennial favourite because it might be humanoid, but it is distinctly non-human.
- The main characters' baby from the Twilight series is seen as an inhuman monster that must be destroyed not because its the child of a vampire, but because it just looks freakin' disturbing!
- Zombies are seen as the most frightening type of monster not because they eat people or are hard to kill, but because they are us, dead and one of the most terrifying moments in our lives is when we see our first corpse.
- Andrew in Bicentennial Man goes through all the points but in his final iteration, he's given flaws and imperfections, a crooked nose, all designed to make him appear human and thus the sharp rise in the valley of the theory.

Its clear in the QC-verse, the need for AI and more specifically their chassis to interact with humans is driven by the Uncanny Valley. You look at every AI in the comic and none of them looks 100% human. There's always something that marks them out as "not human" but still approachable, it could be the colour of their hair, or having an unnatural skin tone, or like Punchbot, just looking like a robot.

Why? Because Humans are keyed to responding to non verbal communication. We arch our eyebrows, the corner of our mouth twitches, we drum our fingers, all of which are clear ways of expressing ourselves. To be a part of that, AI needs to be able to communicate in a way that mirrors its creators. So yeah, its a subconscious part.

TL: Would Faye respond to a toaster, as you asked? Probably not.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 07 Feb 2018, 14:00
I asked not if Faye would be respond to a toaster with Bubble's AI inside, but if toaster with Bubble's AI would respond to Faye. At least the same way Bubble did in current situation. :)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 07 Feb 2018, 14:26
Is it off-topic? Talking about Bubbles's feelings seems to me to be relevant to a strip about Bubbles's feelings. It would irritate the hell out of her if she knew we were discussing her in this academic, abstract fashion, but we aren't in the same universe as her. It doesn't seem likely that any other AIs are listening in. That being the case, I don't see why we shouldn't.

Moderators?

Global Moderator Comment I see it as on topic to discuss Ai responses to human beauty. Anyway if I tried to split the thread it would not split cleanly.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SpanielBear on 07 Feb 2018, 14:30
I asked not if Faye would be respond to a toaster with Bubble's AI inside, but if toaster with Bubble's AI would respond to Faye. At least the same way Bubble did in current situation. :)

Well we know Station had/has a thing for Hannelore, so a humanoid form is not necessary for an AI to develop feelings of attraction. May's interest in... orrifices... would probably remain, even if she transitioned to a fighter jet (which given what Bubbles has said about romance and close air support is TERRIFYING). So it seems for AI's attraction and libido is based on more than just mimicked behaviour due to sharing the appearance of humanity. It has deeper roots than that.

What's also important to note is that these feelings seem to develop based on the AI's experience. Station and May spend a lot of time around and bonding with humans, and their personalities aren't so alien that connection and empathy is impossible. Contrast that with Spookybot, who had little contact with humanity and is the most alien in terms of distance from our frames of reference. She can communicate, but what she thinks and the meaning behind that communication is fundamentally inaccessible to us meat-bags.

The extent to which AI's can form bonds with humans seems to depend on how much time they've spent with us. If Bubbles were a toaster, she may not have had the same bonding experiences and so may not develop the same feelings, depending on the degree to which she had human companionship. But I think it's clear that if her current personality were transferred into a different chassis, her feelings wouldn't immediately change. At the end of the day, AI psychology seems to developmental, not ontological- their personality forms through experience rather than being defined by their body.

Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 07 Feb 2018, 14:43
Ok, tell me if I would came too far.

Bubble's body responds without conscious control for the same reason our bodies do: consciousness is slow. I can only speculate about what consciousness is for, but it reviews action rather than initiating it. Running action past a review function, especially one as multi-purpose and sub-optimized as consciousness, is slow. So, as soon as bodies register severe stress, they slam on the general emergency mode, inform the mind that they are good to go, and ask where to go.
Human consciousness is, maybe, slow - it's basically an interface builded on hundreds of bugged and messy hormonal and instinctive systems, designed to long-forgotten stimules as well as current ones, and designed by a very bad designer (Mother Nature) with basic philosophy "this code worked adequatly when I submitted it, and I don't mind it's so buggy, we saving it for compatibility and support reasons"; so human consciousness just have no direct control to initiating body states.
But I can't see how "running action past a review function" is a bad thing. It's exactly the only way to reduce a chance to be absurdly wasteful by having AI chassis continually able to knock down walls and overturn armored vehicles, and prevent accidents every time Bubbles got distracted. In animal bodies it's kind of awful feedback loops builded on loops, and it's quite ineffective - everybody who ever had hormonal disfunction can vouch for that, I believe. I'd even say if Bubbles have her body entering combat-prime state each time she sees Faye's bottom, it's the very example why such a system is a mess, and why this kind of system design should be avoided.
Of course, AIs can ignore this and put this flawed design to be more like humans. But then we have that Bubbles (or some kind of system behind Bubbles personality) actually wants to act like she do.

[There is a heartbreaking moment in Peter Watts's novel Blindsight in which a soldier who controls a squad of insensate robot killers goes off to die as a rearguard. You know she is dead when her robots all suddenly speed up. They are much more efficient when no longer reviewed by a consciousness; only now there is nothing left with which you could ever possibly make peace.]
Hillarious thing about Blindsight is that species with consciousness (all that messy consciousness Jukka so fond to scold about) is evolutionary more effective that specialised predator without consciousness.

Out of her explosively responsive warrior body, Bubbles might not suffer quite so much, but she would have to work just as hard not to play the fool. Once you are locked into a sociocultural psychosexual matrix, it is not easy to get out, because as far as you can tell, that is just who you are.
So we're saying that AI residing in some body can't review and override this body "preinstalled" reactions. Who is installing and maintaining them then?
I mean, ok, we know that AIs are able to download and install (or remove?) firmwares for their bodies - Momo and Winslow did it in comics (I can't trustfully take instances Pintsize doing same thing, including virus arc somewhere in the beginning of the comics, because he just can mess around with everybody - let's say he isn't reliable narrator). Let's imagine they're not overridable and dictating AI actions and perceptions.
Who write this firmwares?

The extent to which AI's can form bonds with humans seems to depend on how much time they've spent with us. If Bubbles were a toaster, she may not have had the same bonding experiences and so may not develop the same feelings, depending on the degree to which she had human companionship. But I think it's clear that if her current personality were transferred into a different chassis, her feelings wouldn't immediately change. At the end of the day, AI psychology seems to developmental, not ontological- their personality forms through experience rather than being defined by their body.
Let me get it straight. :)
When I'm speaking about "Bubbles reacting like that" I mean "she is uncontrollably aroused by sight of Faye bottoms, and that's makes her feeling uncomfortable". I don't have nothing against romantical bonding like Station had with Hannelore. I'm not wondering how it's possible for AIs to be attracted with humans, it's quite simple. I'm wondering how they happen to be sexually aroused (at least visibly).
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SpanielBear on 07 Feb 2018, 15:02
Let me get it straight. :)
When I'm speaking about "Bubbles reacting like that" I mean "she is uncontrollably aroused by sight of Faye bottoms, and that's makes her feeling uncomfortable". I don't have nothing against romantical bonding like Station had with Hannelore. I'm not wondering how it's possible for AIs to be attracted with humans, it's quite simple. I'm wondering how they happen to be sexually aroused (at least visibly).

Gotcha, and fair question.

I guess it comes back to the singularity, and the fact that AI technology in the QCverse is vastly ahead of ours. In comic it is referred to as "growing" a consciousness, and the process isn't completely understood. From our perspective, the science behind it falls firmly into Clarke's Third Law- "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." But to answer you question "How do AI's have uncontrolled emotional responses" (I think I've got that right?) with "Because Magic" would be completely unsatisfying.

There is some reference in comic to this problem though. I can't remember the exact strip, but I think Momo talks about not thinking faster than humans as a quirk of memory limitation- the background processes required to generate an AI personality use up a lot of the excess computing power an AI might be expected to have. Bear in mind that even with assumed advances in computer technology, the hardware component of an AI's memory cannot be that large- their processors seem to be based in the cranium, so they can't be much bigger than brain sized.

So maybe that's how to look at it. An AI like Spookybot seems to be an avatar of a larger processor, with more memory and so capable of operating with a consciousness beyond a human level. Reducing the size of the processor to one that is commonly held by "regular" AI, or by making it perform additional complex tasks like Station, limits the reaction time and memory availability so the net result is a human-like consciousness that still relies on subconscious functions to reduce the strain on its resources. If you are limited to a human-sized brain, whether that is biological or artificial, it's going to perform in a human-like way. Complete with instinctual level functions that go-on involuntarily, and cause discomfort when they unexpectedly surface. Like thinking "Daaaang that ass is fine".
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 07 Feb 2018, 15:09
But to answer you question "How do AI's have uncontrolled emotional responses" (I think I've got that right?) with "Because Magic" would be completely unsatisfying.
Sorry, no, you haven't got that exactly right.
Question is "How do AIs have uncontrolled emotional responses by every detail resembling human sexual arousment."
Because if there is a emotion that have less social component that direct sexual arousment, I don't know it. It can be emulated, sure - but WHO emulate it in Bubbles?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SpanielBear on 07 Feb 2018, 15:48
But to answer you question "How do AI's have uncontrolled emotional responses" (I think I've got that right?) with "Because Magic" would be completely unsatisfying.
Sorry, no, you haven't got that exactly right.
Question is "How do AIs have uncontrolled emotional responses by every detail resembling human sexual arousment."
Because if there is a emotion that have less social component that direct sexual arousment, I don't know it. It can be emulated, sure - but WHO emulate it in Bubbles?

Well first off I strongly dispute that displays of arousal are non-social. Biologically they are displays to indicate availability and to attract a mate, they are social by necessity.

Secondly, I don't know who is responsible for the "birth" of new AI's in the QCverse. The implication we get though is that post-singularity, the robots are making themselves, and it is the big AI's like Spookybot who oversee the creation of the newbies. And don't forget, AI's are grown, not planned. They have free will, otherwise outliers who fail to conform to their society like May, Corpse Witch, or even Bubbles herself (who had to fight AI prejudice when she joined the military) would never exist- if their personalities could be programmed, they simply wouldn't exist.
The AI's take autonomy and personal choice *very* seriously, and regard the blackmail that Corpse Witch used as morally reprehensible. So given this background, they are unlikely to be hypocritical enough to programme their "children" in such a way that their self expression is limited.

Sex is, for better or worse, a huge part of human society. Our interactions- flirting, compliments, romantic attraction, even negative things like insults or objectification, all rely on a shared assumption that sex is a big deal. If AI's want to interact with humanity on an equal level (by which I mean, have a relationship with humans that mirrors that which humans have with each other), they need to take that focus into account. Creating AI's that mirror all human emotions apart from sexual ones would severely limit the relationships those AI's could form.

By this I don't mean to say that a non-romantic relationship is limited, I absolutely do not mean that. What I mean is that to understand humans and our emotional lives, you need to be able to empathise with our experiences and feelings, and that includes our sexual ones. Making AI's that can share those feelings isn't frivolous, it's efficient.

Furthermore, in creating an AI personality, deliberately programming it to be asexual rather than allowing that to be an attitude it can develop or not as it self-discovers would be like programming it to be straight, or gay, or to hate mice- it would limit the AI's freedom, and would be very similar to what Corpse Witch did to Bubbles- restricting her choice by abusing the fact that her mind is artificial. The AI's have shown they absolutely will not stand for that shit, so they are likely not going to force that on their children.

(P.S. I'm aware while I am writing this I am steering into questions about sexual identity that matter a lot, and that as a straight cis male I do not have a wide personal experience with. I really apologise if I end up being offensive or ignorant here, please do call me out on that if I am, I promise it would be unintentional on my part.)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ckridge on 07 Feb 2018, 16:09
But I can't see how "running action past a review function" is a bad thing. It's exactly the only way to reduce a chance to be absurdly wasteful by having AI chassis continually able to knock down walls and overturn armored vehicles, and prevent accidents every time Bubbles got distracted. In animal bodies it's kind of awful feedback loops builded on loops, and it's quite ineffective - everybody who ever had hormonal disfunction can vouch for that, I believe. I'd even say if Bubbles have her body entering combat-prime state each time she sees Faye's bottom, it's the very example why such a system is a mess, and why this kind of system design should be avoided.
Of course, AIs can ignore this and put this flawed design to be more like humans. But then we have that Bubbles (or some kind of system behind Bubbles personality) actually wants to act like she do.

Running action past a review function isn't a bad thing. It is slow, is all. If you had to consciously coordinate walking, you couldn't react fast enough to keep your balance. Anything that has to be done fast is kept below the level of consciousness. Emergency responses must be done fast, particularly by soldiers. Thus when Bubbles is wounded to the heart by seeing Faye half-dressed, her body goes on full alert without her having a thing to say about it. This is not to say that she gets ready to fight. Humans interpret a racing heart, shortened breath, flushing, and trembling in wildly different ways according to context, and so, evidently, do AIs.

This is all wholly embedded in romantic tradition, not because Jeph planned it out that way, but because he is embedded in the tradition along with us and with Bubbles, and once he wrote a character in armor, the story began to unfold itself.

'Her hair was down, and her feet were bare, and the sight of her on the stair sent such sorrow licking along Prince Lír’s bones that he dropped his poems and his pretenses together and actually turned to run. But he was a hero in all ways, and he turned bravely back to face her, saying in a calm and courtly manner, “Give you good evening, my lady.”' -- Peter Beagle, The Last Unicorn
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ckridge on 07 Feb 2018, 16:45
Because if there is a emotion that have less social component that direct sexual arousment, I don't know it. It can be emulated, sure - but WHO emulate it in Bubbles?

Here, I think, we have the heart of the question.

There is no question that human sexual arousal is accompanied by a biological response and occurs in particular humans. That said, how those particular humans interpret arousal is all over the map and is the most social thing possible. The last time I checked, the U.S. consensus is that the ideally sexually arousing woman has the face of a twelve-year-old girl, the breasts of a nursing mother, and the body of a boy athlete. None of those three is biologically optimal, since all three of them signal infertility. That is what counts as normal here, and it gets more extravagant from there. Sexual arousal is completely permeated and threaded through with literature, with poetry, with art, with cinema, with popular songs, with advertising, with status markers, with religion, with resentment, with fear, and with power relations. It was all built up on that primal, powerful impulse, but it is its own old, rich, changing, complicated set of traditions now. This is why old people, who have very few sex hormones left in their systems, can still feel it.

That is why AIs can learn arousal. They no doubt feel something different in their metal and plastic bodies than I do, but I strongly suspect that women, much younger men, and much older men do too, and that it still counts as arousal.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: fayelovesbubbles on 07 Feb 2018, 18:28
Here's some more poetry that Bubbles might relate to.

but my tongue is frozen in silence;
 instantly a delicate flame runs beneath my skin;
 with my eyes I see nothing;
 my ears make a whirring noise.

 A cold sweat covers me,
trembling seizes my body,
 and I am greener than grass.

 Lacking but little of death do I seem.


 
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 07 Feb 2018, 18:34
Well first off I strongly dispute that displays of arousal are non-social. Biologically they are displays to indicate availability and to attract a mate, they are social by necessity.
The last time I checked, the U.S. consensus is that the ideally sexually arousing woman has the face of a twelve-year-old girl, the breasts of a nursing mother, and the body of a boy athlete.
No-no-no, displays of arousal are 100% social. Arousal itself isn't. Arousal is arousal and defined biologically (and actually that's why libido is lowering with age - when you would be perfectly ridden of hormones working in arousal, oxytocin for example, you would quite probably be dead, or at least have quite serious problems). How society and person itself reacting on people showing arousal is completly another matter.
I'm sorry for bringing example, if somebody would see it as offensive, that's an example I had in university.
Let's imagine you feel arousal when see plush chairs. You feel arousal, but in the society you lives it's no-go. People demand to you to conform and feel arousal to a woman who has the face of a twelve-year-old girl, the breasts of a nursing mother, and the body of a boy athlete (let's use US Target for simplicity), but you can't and plush chairs is your thing. You're shunned as freak by people around, "that's ok to feel arousal to US Target, but plush chairs? whats wrong with you?". Hello, social rejection.
It's not the worst scenario. It's quite possible you feel arousal but voices in your own head speaks to you - "no-go". "People like you are counted as freaks around here, and we don't want this to happen with us, do we? Shush back into subconcious, this chair, let's not be aware and hit that US Target moving around!" To help this voices, humans have help button "activate arousal by stimulating erogenous zones", and also humans are rewarded with oxytocin blast for conforming society (same oxytocin that activating in sexual arousal), so person in question can live in happy marriage with US Target for years. But stress would accumulate, and quite possibly would boom sooner or later, some way or another. Hello, sexuality-based traumas.

If you had to consciously coordinate walking, you couldn't react fast enough to keep your balance.
Quite the opposite. If I really need to keep my balance (let's say it's unknown night forest) I would drop reflexive walking and start to look my steps. As conditions became less familiar, I would take more attention.
The problem with consciousness isn't that it's slow. Problem is it's small. Human consciousness have little field of attention, so untrained person can't, say, thinking about six or seven unrelated issues at once. Imagine computer with two terabyte RAM installed, but application is allowed to get 256 kB - of course it would looks slow. But if anything else you have is oversized software routines written by awful programmer and tending to be bugged as a hell and sometimes crushing your system, you'll use something beyond this 256 kBs only when you're perfectly sure in situation.
Anyway, as Bubbles declaring that he haven't access to the part of mind Corpse Witch blocked, and point it as something non-usual, it's safe to assume she normally have full access to her mind.

That is why AIs can learn arousal. They no doubt feel something different in their metal and plastic bodies than I do, but I strongly suspect that women, much younger men, and much older men do too, and that it still counts as arousal.
Actually it's called "Qualia problem" - how to prove that my sensual experience is correlated with yours in any way - and is one of the most heatenly debated questions of modern psychology. :) But with arousal it's quite simpler then with, for example, color perception. Arousal have physiological markers, no markers - no arousal.


Let me try to show what I mean by this way:
Imagine situation in "Basic Decency", but there Bubbles is a human woman, not AI. What is happening?
She's entering the room and seeing Faye bottom. Faye is her thing, her body reacts with arousal, her nipples erecting, pupils dilating... well, I will not list full spectrum. Bubbles identify this reaction as arousal. AFAIK in US (and in Western World) it's not counted nice to feel arousal to another person beyond some specific situations (nobody said social demands are always reasonable or even feasible; but, for reference, recall reaction Faye had when Marten asked her can he lust her secretly, it's 4), so she feel bad and shunned, it's mixing with arousal, and her inability to hide arousal. "That's not how good girls behave!", she is lectured by her own morality. So she turns around, shunned, and asking Faye to remove stress factor. Perfectly understandable and common situation, I believe most of us being here at least once.

Ok, current situation.
Bubbles entering room and seeing Faye bottom. Some X happens. Bubbles identify this X as arousal, then every step from previous example, because it's how AIs build their social behavour (and I'm completly OK with it). X definitly isn't human arousal, so it's some reaction put into her body or mind which Bubbles identify with arousal and then behave following social protocols. What is X?
If it's some kind of uncontrollable special reaction directly placed there to mimic human arousal (for example, some kind of software subroutine that downcycling processors a bit and loading part of RAM with nasty pictures), who placed it there, and how exactly it's triggering?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ckridge on 07 Feb 2018, 18:48
I will respond in detail later, but I must point out that you keep insisting that someone must have put a sexual arousal program into Bubbles. That's not the way even the primitive AIs we actually have work. They teach themselves, and by doing so are able to do things that merely programmed AIs cannot. We have every reason to suppose that the AIs in QC would teach themselves arousal, some by looking at porn and some by reading novels.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SpanielBear on 07 Feb 2018, 19:20
What is X?

Mega-snip

I think the qualia problem is a good one to reference here, because it (unsurprisingly) also comes up in philosophy, which has spent a long time trying to answer the question "What is a mind" (The answer, for people playing at home, is "I 'unno.". It's *always* "I 'unno". Philosophy is an incredibly frustating degree). Like you say, the problem of only having priviledged access to our own minds means that we have to operate on assumptions about what other people feel and think, based on incomplete information.

Analogy time! Wittgenstein came up with a thought experiment involving a beetle in a box. Everyone has a beetle in a box. We can talk to each other about our beetles, describe them to one another- "My beetle has shiny wings", "My beetle has lovely mandibles"- and we all think we know what we're talking about. The problem is, because we can't show each other our beetles, what we think we know about the other person is only an assumption. When someone says "My beetle has eight legs" we're surprised and confused, because we thought we knew what we were talking about but it turns out it's just a house of cards. The same when talking about the mind.

Thing is, this happens even between two regular humans. The qualia problem is exactly that- I cannot know what it's like to be you. I can only assume that, because most of the time you and I share emotional responses, react in certain ways, you are like me. But that isn't the same as *knowing* that you are. When you say "I am sad", I cannot know what that feels like for you. I can only compare it to what I feel when I use that word, and react accordingly. Unless something happens that shows I am making a mistake, any differences just wont be apparent.

So what's the point of all that? Well, basically if I can't know what another person is feeling, but still try to empathise with them, why would a person-mimicking AI be any different? Bubbles is formatted differently, but functionaly she is identical to Faye or any other person. When she talks about anger, sadness or arousal, she demonstrates human-like behaviours that correlate with those words. As long as that correlation persists, I am faced with a choice of whether to behave as though she has those emotions or not. I could make a mistake either way. But the consequence of me behaving as though a feeling entity has no emotions would be far worse than the other way around.

This is on a day to day level. You mention about biological markers for arousal, which can be detected and are indicative. Assuming for a moment that those markers are always accurate (Which they aren't. The room could be cold, you could have high blood pressure- sometimes a cigar is just an erection. I mean cigar.), presumably one could with sufficient technology match the brain state to the emotion. Reasonably one could assume one could also do the same with a robotic mind- find the string of code that indicates arousal. But in both cases, knowing what it looks like tells us nothing about what it feels like. We can see which part of the brain lights up in response to pain, but the feeling is going to be different between the person who has stubbed their toe and the person who is into BDSM. We are back to having to use empathy and assumptions to guide us into what their inner life is like, and again, humans and robots wouldn't be that different in that regard.

The problem is, the ultimate question you seem to be asking is "how are QC AI's programmed?", which is a damn good question, but one we have no idea how to begin answering, because it's so advanced from our perspective. So we are stuck with treating them like metal people, which, to be fair, in universe is how they want to be treated. Just because two minds are made differently tells us nothing about what it's like to have either of them, if functionally they are identical.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SpanielBear on 07 Feb 2018, 19:52
Comic!

A moment's silence, please, for the many Bothans who died to bring Faye this revelation.

Alas, their sacrifice was in vain.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: TheEvilDog on 07 Feb 2018, 19:56
I felt a great disturbance in the Forum, as if millions of shippers suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible has happened.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: tut21 on 07 Feb 2018, 19:59
Comic!

A moment's silence, please, for the many Bothans who died to bring Faye this revelation.

Alas, their sacrifice was in vain.

That's okay. The important part is that Faye briefly considered the idea for the first time. It will return.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 07 Feb 2018, 20:07
Quote
They teach themselves, and by doing so are able to do things that merely programmed AIs cannot.
So that just means Bubbles put this program into herself. I'm just using cybernetic terms AIs themself speaks, but I'm entirely ok with a "who teached Bubbles about arousal?"

Quote
We have every reason to suppose that the AIs in QC would teach themselves arousal, some by looking at porn and some by reading novels.
Look into porno or novel. What would do you see?
1. Vague description of inner emotional state, that can't really be translated even to another human - it's qualia problem, we can't directly transfer sensual information; but, as we all have human bodies, we can safely assume that common reader/watcher felt arousal at least once.
2. Physical, and quite often very detailed, description of physiological effects. To learn about them it's actually better to look into medical book.
What exactly can be learned with such materials by a person that never experienced arousing? Do you ever tried to explain to child with words and images how orgasm feels?

Quote
Philosophy is an incredibly frustating degree).
I know, right? :)

Quote
Reasonably one could assume one could also do the same with a robotic mind- find the string of code that indicates arousal.
...and when it's achieved we have upload - a mean to retranslate human mind into robotic chassis. Which is directly defined as impossible feat (at least yet) in QC universe.

Quote
I can only compare it to what I feel when I use that word, and react accordingly. Unless something happens that shows I am making a mistake, any differences just wont be apparent.
And that's the thing with us both being humans - we have similar base to start with. You have skin, I have skin, our skins are composed with basically same chemicals, they have basically same structure. When you're saying "I have a burn and now it's painful", I have actual reason to believe your experience is somehow close to mine. Not working each time, but empirically it gives humans enough common ground to understand each other.
Imagine we have AI put into toaster. It never had nociceptors, organic brain or cortisol reaction. I can't know what do he means, and I haven't any reason he means something like MY pain, because I know how it works and I know he lacks parts for it. That's not making him lesser, but it making him alien.
That's why I'm absolutely ok with AIs developing higher or abstract emotions. Love, happiness, suffering, sadness, aesthetic sense, religious sense - sure. Fear, loss, anger, sympathy, loneliness, affection - sure. I do believe that this kind of things are based on self-reflection and introspection.

Quote
When she talks about anger, sadness or arousal, she demonstrates human-like behaviours that correlate with those words.
I believe she never talked about arousal. ;)

Quote
So we are stuck with treating them like metal people, which, to be fair, in universe is how they want to be treated. Just because two minds are made differently tells us nothing about what it's like to have either of them, if functionally they are identical.
And so it goes - it's exactly problem that bothers me like a hell, so I even registered here on forum to write a big post about it. :)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SpanielBear on 07 Feb 2018, 20:38
I get that. I guess why it doesn't bother me as much is that while it's true we humans share biology, there is so much differences between our experiences culturally that running into the qualia problem is pretty inevitable. I didn't use the BDSM example in my last post for no reason; narrowing down feelings and emotions to just one sensation is incredibly complex, even impossible. Take anger. That word is descriptive, but the feeling could be overwhelming rage, the manifestation of stress, or the result of not having eaten all day. And that's assuming we can even identify our own emotions with any accuracy. The end result is we are having to make these assumptions and form incomplete pictures of others, and as long as it works we muddle through.

Let's go back to your toaster. Which is not a sentence I thought I'd ever write, but never mind. If the toaster reports feeling pain, you are right that it almost certainly is experiencing different qualia to you. But the question then becomes, what is it trying to say? Because assuming it is an intelligent toaster, it has the same knowledge you do- it knows you feel things differently than it does. So when it complains about pain, what reaction does it hope to get? Why say that?

My assumption is that although the feeling is different, the function is similar. Whatever it is feeling is intense discomfort and requires immediate attention. As it is distinct from human pain, it could signify it differently by using a different word, "I am feeling Gubrily". But what's the point of saying that to an English speaking human? The toaster gains nothing by the distinction. But if it has knowledge of humans and English, it could see that saying "I am feeling pain" could acheive it's goal- the human could help make the sensation go away.

Bubbles has needs which are functionaly emotional, and is operating in a human society where those needs are only going to be met if she can communicate them. The exact qualia she experiences are ultimately irrelevant, as long as the communication works between her and those she associates with. On a wider level, AI's in their programming can make that communication as subtle or as explicit as they like- so they can use their words, or also program in non-verbal communication cues that work just as well. The human language is there, so while they are with us they have no reason not use it.

I don't think you're wrong to find this bothersome. Humanity doesn't have an alien alternative point of reference in this way, and it is fascinating to think about what that relationship would be like. But for myself, I find the short-hand sufficient. The AI's pass the Turing test enough that they don't trigger the uncanny valley for me. But I think that is ultimately subjective.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Penquin47 on 07 Feb 2018, 20:57
But we don't get to see if she put on pajama bottoms!!!  This is very important information!!!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Neko_Ali on 07 Feb 2018, 21:02
Whelp.... It's been a long time since I put this up, but it's clearly needed again. C'mon old friend. You are called to service once again. *lovingly gets down the Clue by Four from it's stand* Ooooohhhh Faaaaayyyye....
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Tova on 07 Feb 2018, 21:10
Careful, that clue by four may well kill her.  :lol:
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: fayelovesbubbles on 07 Feb 2018, 21:12
I can't get past the idea that Bubbles needs a bed and she must be so uncomfortable sitting on the floor like that. Yes, I know, I know, AIs don't need a comfortable bed, but would it really kill them to have one?

Faye: Bubbles, let's get you a bed.

Bubbles: It's okay. I don't need a bed like you do.

Faye: Come on. Why not?

Bubbles: Really, it's okay. I don't need a bed.

Faye. Sigh...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Tova on 07 Feb 2018, 21:19
Bubbles is nothing if not pragmatic, and a second bed would take up a lot of floor space. It would probably drive them crazy.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: TheEvilDog on 07 Feb 2018, 21:24
It might also be a survival mechanism for Bubbles, making herself as small a target as possible when she’s at her most vulnerable, when charging.

Plus I imagine a reinforced bed is pretty expensive.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: fayelovesbubbles on 07 Feb 2018, 21:24
Bubbles is nothing if not pragmatic, and a second bed would take up a lot of floor space. It would probably drive them crazy.

Bubbles is the type where she could share a bed for a night with someone she's super attracted to and absolutely nothing would happen, because Bubbles is a lady.

Actually in my user picture they're sort of sharing the bed. I'm too lazy to find that comic. Blegh.

I know I sound like a shipper, but it feels nice to see Faye and Bubbles be close to each other, which is why I picked that picture.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 07 Feb 2018, 21:54
Quote
The problem with consciousness isn't that it's slow.

It took my conscious mind days to add up all the danger signs in that parking lot incident, an incident to which my hindbrain reacted in about a second.

******

BenRG nailed it. The Pugnacious Peach is not oblivious. This is active denial.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Tova on 07 Feb 2018, 22:00
Yes, I agree. For whatever reasons. (edit: I mean she's in denial for whatever reasons, not I agree for whatever reasons  :mrgreen:)

On a topic that is only superficially related to physical space, I am kind of surprised that Faye and Bubbles get on so well without friction (that we've seen - I think) given that they are pretty well living in each others pockets. They share a house, share a bedroom, and work with each other. I've known couples that end up working in the same company, and they went to some trouble to ensure they were in different projects.

Speaking personally, I do not think it would be good for my relationship for my partner if we were to work with each other. And when we're on holiday, we usually have at least one day or half day where we separate and do our own thing. Even though (or maybe because) by the end, we are really wanting to get back together and share with each other what we've experienced.

Close relationships are a wonderful thing, but people need their space.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 07 Feb 2018, 22:12
Let's go back to your toaster. Which is not a sentence I thought I'd ever write, but never mind. If the toaster reports feeling pain, you are right that it almost certainly is experiencing different qualia to you. But the question then becomes, what is it trying to say? Because assuming it is an intelligent toaster, it has the same knowledge you do- it knows you feel things differently than it does. So when it complains about pain, what reaction does it hope to get? Why say that?

As I said I never had a problem with a AI developing love, affection, anger, suffering. If toaster would say he is in pain, I'd assume that he is experiencing suffering, and wouldn't try to feed painkillers to him. Actually having AIs around would turn this kind of semantic to actually major thing. It's entirely possible to feel suffering without pain, and affection without arousal. When AI would try to learn what's love is, I really hope they wouldn't use porn or romantic novels only, but would look into Lee works, for example.

Bubbles has needs which are functionaly emotional, and is operating in a human society where those needs are only going to be met if she can communicate them. The exact qualia she experiences are ultimately irrelevant, as long as the communication works between her and those she associates with. On a wider level, AI's in their programming can make that communication as subtle or as explicit as they like- so they can use their words, or also program in non-verbal communication cues that work just as well. The human language is there, so while they are with us they have no reason not use it.
Once again I should point that I haven't problem with any AI developing love or affection. Station and Winslow developed it to Hannelore. Momo has it for Marigold. Pintsize has it for Marten and Faye. May had it about Dale (and about Momo, by the way). I never tried to make assumption about arousal being basis for affection, for instance.
Problem is, Bubbles shows reactions that linked in our culture to arousal (or, if you want, lust). Why functionaly emotional need (let's use term "storge (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_wheel_theory_of_love#Storge)", I believe it fits) would create specific responses our culture uses to block lust?
That's it - human language is here. We have different words for arousal and love, for agape and storge, for pain and suffering, for hope and expectancy; we're messing around with them, trying to rely on context and some kind of shared experience of being physical persons, reading same books, listening one music, all that things. And if toaster AI would want to minimize human being confused, why not using correct term humans have, not a term linked to physical sensation toaster haven't?
The problem would be that humans would need to learn human languages as well.

Actually a lot of things would be easier. Imagine "Return of the Jedi", scene where Solo asking Leia is she loves Luke.
Leia: I storge him, not eros him.
Solo: *happy*
Miscommunication: Avoided. AI: Happy.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: fayelovesbubbles on 07 Feb 2018, 22:15
Everyone remember how embarrassed Bubbles was when she explained the situation to Clinton: "We do not SLEEP together. We merely share a room." She wouldn't even let anyone get the wrong idea.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 07 Feb 2018, 22:19
Quote
The problem with consciousness isn't that it's slow.

It took my conscious mind days to add up all the danger signs in that parking lot incident, an incident to which my hindbrain reacted in about a second.
When I was 15, I was into Castaneda thing in russian "new-agers" interpretation. Awareness trainings was fun, but depressing, because I lost the last reason to get rid with bad reaction.
It happened I'm not having bad reaction, I just too lazy.

Everyone remember how embarrassed Bubbles was when she explained the situation to Clinton: "We do not SLEEP together. We merely share a room." She wouldn't even let anyone get the wrong idea.
And so she prefer to sleep with Faye in the room with only one bed.
Clever plan!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: fayelovesbubbles on 07 Feb 2018, 22:25
Bubbles insists that she doesn't need to share the bed because AIs don't need the human comforts, but the real reason she can't is that her face would be burning and there would be much "fweeeee" going on if they shared a bed.

: p

Faye would be none the wiser. "Wow, Bubs, it's great sharing the bed with you. Night!"

Although tonight's comic shows she might be getting some awareness of her feelings.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: fayelovesbubbles on 07 Feb 2018, 22:36
I just went back and found a comic where Dora is teasing Faye about having a crush on Bubbles. Faye can't catch a break--not from her sister, or Dora, or Claire or Marten, who also wondered aloud if there's something going on.

Poor Faye. Poor Bubbles. Will everyone just stop???
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 07 Feb 2018, 22:41
I just went back and found a comic where Dora is teasing Faye about having a crush on Bubbles. Faye can't catch a break--not from her sister, or Dora, or Claire or Marten, who also wondered aloud if there's something going on.

Poor Faye. Poor Bubbles. Will everyone just stop???
Nope. All of their friends are too kind just to let it go. They would try to fix love life of two oblivious sweethearts.
...God, how I hated when my friends tried to fix my love life...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: fayelovesbubbles on 07 Feb 2018, 22:46
To be honest, I wouldn't object to someone trying to fix mine. Blergh.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: BenRG on 07 Feb 2018, 23:07
Yep, like I said yesterday, Faye is 100% deep in denial. She's not only in denial about Bubbles's reactions to her but, as we see in today's strip, she's also in denial about her own feelings. Panel 4 makes it quite clear that she realises what she and Evie said to each other about Bubbles can be taken in a certain way but cannot and will not accept that interpretation right now.

In his footer text, Jeph promises that it will all make sense in the morning. I'm not sure that I believe that!

Meanwhile, long-hair Bubbles has added a few more notches onto the 'cute' scale in my book!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: fayelovesbubbles on 07 Feb 2018, 23:27
Well, whatever Faye feels, I admit that I have a crush on Bubbles. Haha.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Tova on 07 Feb 2018, 23:36
In his footer text, Jeph promises that it will all make sense in the morning. I'm not sure that I believe that!

Indeed. Think it's missing a /s.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Tova on 08 Feb 2018, 01:43
Quote from: BenRG
Faye isn't oblivious, rather she is actively in denial about Bubbles's reaction to her.

I believe this.

Do you think Faye is also in denial about her own budding and unclear feelings toward Bubbles?

I think that as far as Faye is concerned, her feelings towards Bubbles are perfectly clear.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: BenRG on 08 Feb 2018, 02:06
I asked not if Faye would be respond to a toaster with Bubble's AI inside...

FWIW, I'd like for a human/AI love story (even if told as a lesson from history) where the human fell in love with a totally disembodied AI simply because he or she was kind, empathetic and shared a lot of the human's interests. It is only later that the AI used first a holo-avatar and then later an anthromimetic chassis and the relationship became physical (and ultimately ended with marriage and the adoption of children).

I'd also like for there to be a number of AIs to be against cross-species romance for various reasons, some political and some due to pure bigotry.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Pennepasta on 08 Feb 2018, 02:07
Yes, I agree. For whatever reasons. (edit: I mean she's in denial for whatever reasons, not I agree for whatever reasons  :mrgreen:)

On a topic that is only superficially related to physical space, I am kind of surprised that Faye and Bubbles get on so well without friction (that we've seen - I think) given that they are pretty well living in each others pockets. They share a house, share a bedroom, and work with each other. I've known couples that end up working in the same company, and they went to some trouble to ensure they were in different projects.

Speaking personally, I do not think it would be good for my relationship for my partner if we were to work with each other. And when we're on holiday, we usually have at least one day or half day where we separate and do our own thing. Even though (or maybe because) by the end, we are really wanting to get back together and share with each other what we've experienced.

Close relationships are a wonderful thing, but people need their space.

Different couples need different amounts of space. For example, I know a couple who are probably in their fifties, and have worked together all their working life - they're currently running a cafe, and have run hotels together in the past, so lots of time at work. Seems utterly crazy to me, but works for them.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Case on 08 Feb 2018, 02:23
Quote from: BenRG
Faye isn't oblivious, rather she is actively in denial about Bubbles's reaction to her.

I believe this.

Do you think Faye is also in denial about her own budding and unclear feelings toward Bubbles?

I think that as far as Faye is concerned, her feelings towards Bubbles are perfectly clear.

Well, in the sense that a wood is still a wood even though you can't see it for all the dang trees getting in the way, that assessment of her emotional forestscape is probably even technically accurate.

(Yes, forestscape (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/forestscape) is actually a word. And no, it doesn't appear to be a transliteration from an originally German compound-noun, we must have missed that one. Congrats, Ingleses! ... won't happen again ...)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ckridge on 08 Feb 2018, 04:32
Faye used to sleep way over on the other side of the bed away from Bubbles. http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3523
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: traroth on 08 Feb 2018, 04:42
I'm tempted to say I'm impatient to see tomorrow's comic, but I kind of lost hope for a conclusion of any sort...

Also: Are Bubbles' hair growing?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: BenRG on 08 Feb 2018, 05:05
Also: Are Bubbles' hair growing?

It's more interesting than that: It's been established in the comic that Synthetics' hair does not 'grow'. You have to soak it in a polymer which, as it dries, lengthens the 'hair' strands. So, to 'grow' her hair, Bubbles would have had to purchase materials and set aside some time to work on it.

For whose benefit I wonder? Did Faye mention that she liked Dora's longer hair and Bubbles felt bound to respond?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: NemesisDancer on 08 Feb 2018, 05:59
I can't get past the idea that Bubbles needs a bed and she must be so uncomfortable sitting on the floor like that. Yes, I know, I know, AIs don't need a comfortable bed, but would it really kill them to have one?

Faye: Bubbles, let's get you a bed.

Bubbles: It's okay. I don't need a bed like you do.

Faye: Come on. Why not?

Bubbles: Really, it's okay. I don't need a bed.

Faye. Sigh...

It might be that they can't afford another bed at the moment, as they're only really scraping rent and food costs from Union Robotics (though Melon's intervention appears to have helped somewhat!)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Neko_Ali on 08 Feb 2018, 06:12
I asked not if Faye would be respond to a toaster with Bubble's AI inside...

FWIW, I'd like for a human/AI love story (even if told as a lesson from history) where the human fell in love with a totally disembodied AI simply because he or she was kind, empathetic and shared a lot of the human's interests. It is only later that the AI used first a holo-avatar and then later an anthromimetic chassis and the relationship became physical (and ultimately ended with marriage and the adoption of children).


Mass Effect 2 & 3, EDI and Joker. EDI is the artificial intelligence that runs their ship and Joker is the pilot. At first she's always angry at him because he's reckless and disorderly, he hates her because she's critical about everything he does and he hates someone always looking over his shoulder. Eventually it turns into grudging admiration and respect then love and EDI winds up with a very female humanoid body.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Stoutfellow on 08 Feb 2018, 06:20
Mass Effect 2 & 3, EDI and Joker. EDI is the artificial intelligence that runs their ship and Joker is the pilot. At first she's always angry at him because he's wreckless and disorderly[.]

I would think wrecklessness would be a good thing in a pilot. :-)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ckridge on 08 Feb 2018, 06:22
Here's some more poetry that Bubbles might relate to.

but my tongue is frozen in silence;
 instantly a delicate flame runs beneath my skin;
 with my eyes I see nothing;
 my ears make a whirring noise.

 A cold sweat covers me,
trembling seizes my body,
 and I am greener than grass.

 Lacking but little of death do I seem.


Sappho. Thank you. I had never given those verses proper attention.

Only fragments of her work remain, and the history of Western love poetry can be read as a series of attempts to reconstruct them.
 
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SpanielBear on 08 Feb 2018, 06:29
Here's some more poetry that Bubbles might relate to.

but my tongue is frozen in silence;
 instantly a delicate flame runs beneath my skin;
 with my eyes I see nothing;
 my ears make a whirring noise.

 A cold sweat covers me,
trembling seizes my body,
 and I am greener than grass.

 Lacking but little of death do I seem.


Sappho. Thank you. I had never given those verses proper attention.

Only fragments of her work remain, and the history of Western love poetry can be read as a series of attempts to reconstruct them.

Be reasonable. Sometimes we're attempting to channel Catullus.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ckridge on 08 Feb 2018, 06:40
Note that today's strip is perfectly ambiguous as to whether Faye has considered the possibility she loves Bubbles, the possibility Bubbles loves her, or both. This is not accidental on Jeph's part. Note also that the thought happens on the border between sleep and waking, which is as near as a cartoonist can come to showing you what is going on in someone's subconscious.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: shanejayell on 08 Feb 2018, 07:04
Jeph is SUCH a tease.  :laugh: :lol:
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: MattStriker on 08 Feb 2018, 07:56
Jeph is SUCH a tease.  :laugh: :lol:

A sadistic bastard is what he is :P.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Thrudd on 08 Feb 2018, 08:27
Tomorrow it will be snakes and smoothies as Sam drops by to ask for some shop help from Big Sis Faye, pester her Big Brother and terrify the lubricant out of Pintsize.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ckridge on 08 Feb 2018, 08:32

No-no-no, displays of arousal are 100% social. Arousal itself isn't. Arousal is arousal and defined biologically (and actually that's why libido is lowering with age - when you would be perfectly ridden of hormones working in arousal, oxytocin for example, you would quite probably be dead, or at least have quite serious problems). How society and person itself reacting on people showing arousal is completly another matter.

I'm sorry for bringing example, if somebody would see it as offensive, that's an example I had in university.

Let's imagine you feel arousal when see plush chairs. You feel arousal, but in the society you lives it's no-go. People demand to you to conform and feel arousal to a woman who has the face of a twelve-year-old girl, the breasts of a nursing mother, and the body of a boy athlete (let's use US Target for simplicity), but you can't and plush chairs is your thing. You're shunned as freak by people around, "that's ok to feel arousal to US Target, but plush chairs? whats wrong with you?". Hello, social rejection.

 . . .

Actually it's called "Qualia problem" - how to prove that my sensual experience is correlated with yours in any way - and is one of the most heatenly debated questions of modern psychology. :) But with arousal it's quite simpler then with, for example, color perception. Arousal have physiological markers, no markers - no arousal.


>Arousal is arousal and defined biologically  . . .

>Arousal have physiological markers, no markers - no arousal.

>Let's imagine you feel arousal when see plush chairs.

From these passages, I gather that you mean that the object of arousal may be entirely socially determined, since it does not seem possible that some section of DNA codes for attraction to chairs, no matter how curvaceous, cozy, plushy, and compliant; but that the sensation of arousal is 100% biological. That narrows down the field of argument a lot.

Let me propose a thought-experiment: Suppose someone goes to their doctor and says "I'm sexually dysfunctional. I desire my spouse intensely, but my body can't respond properly. The frustration is killing me." The doctor hooks the patient up to some instruments and directs them to think longingly of their spouse, and says "No, you are mistaken. Your erectile tissue is not tumescent when you think about your spouse, and since arousal is 100% biological, that means you aren't feeling desire. There is no problem here." Would the doctor's response be correct? If not, and if arousal is 100% biological, why not?

>Actually it's called "Qualia problem"

You argue from analogy here, writing that since humans have bodies analogous to our own, we have better reason to believe that they have sensations like our own than we would have for believing that robots did, regardless of what robots claimed. This argument is invalid. We decided that those neural structures correspond to those sensations by asking humans what they felt and then seeing what neural structures are activated when they say they feel that way. The fundamental evidence was the assertion of a feeling. The neural structure's involvement in that feeling was deduced on the basis of the assertion. Denying someone else's assertion that they feel that way because they haven't got the neural structure would be disregarding equally good evidence for no good reason. 

I am going to synopsize my views on the subject of robot desire in the QC universe briefly and then leave off discussing it here, since we should be talking mostly about Faye's pillow thoughts now. We can pick it up in your topic if you want.

AIs in this universe are largely self-programming. They have learning programs and built-in goals, both quite flexible. In all probability, they are being built mostly by other post-Singularity AIs who are smarter than humans, reasonably well-disposed toward humans for some mysterious reason, and deeply averse to any interference in AI free will.

A subset of AIs are interested in friendship with humans, and learn -- program themselves, if you will -- about humans just as humans do, by immersing themselves in human culture. In this way, they learn what is thought desirable, beautiful, estimable, seductive, intoxicating, and so on, and they internalize these values, just as humans do. 

AIs who are interested in associating with humans put on bodies for this purpose. Their bodies have automatic stress reactions producing simple, powerful mental events that are analogous to but not identical with ones humans have under similar circumstances. Just as with humans, these simple, powerful sensations are capable of a very wide set of possible interpretations depending on the context and on what part of the human sociocultural psychosexual matrix the robot has become embedded in. The same basic sensations may be experienced as fear, sadness, anger, pleasurable excitement, arousal, drunkenness, desire, or any combination of these depending on circumstance and on whom the robot has learned to be.

I am pretty sure that if an AI wished to consummate their learned desires sexually, they would have to download an extra application. We know that they can run pleasure whenever they want, but find it empty as an isolated experience. A simple robot application for having sex with humans might go something like this:

1. Make touching the human pleasurable.
2. Make being touched by the human pleasurable.
3. Make signs of pleasure from the human pleasurable.
4. Let the pleasure build to some kind of release and then drop off sharply, lest the robot persist to the point that the human becomes over-tired.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 08 Feb 2018, 09:13
Quote
I am going to synopsize my views on the subject of robot desire in the QC universe briefly and then leave off discussing it here, since we should be talking mostly about Faye's pillow thoughts now. We can pick it up in your topic if you want.
I'd like to, because it really feels as off-topic here.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ckridge on 08 Feb 2018, 09:21
OK, respond there, and I will reply there.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ckridge on 08 Feb 2018, 09:26
I feel faintly voyeuristic and guilty about looking in on them sleeping and on Faye's night thoughts. If it were a novel, I would only be inside her head. If it were a movie, I would only see. Here I see and am inside her head. Odd that such a simple form would be able to do something like that.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Case on 08 Feb 2018, 09:43
To be honest, I wouldn't object to someone trying to fix mine. Blergh.

My high-school 'friends' idea of "fixing my love life" was schlepping a slightly underage vague acquaintance to our graduation ball without an invitation, aiming her at me, and watching the results from a safe distance.  Moment I saw her, I realized that:
a) Those morons' idea of "fixing someone's lovelife" was pretty much: "We've seen him interacting friendly-like with her once while he was tending bar, ergo it must be twue wuv!"
b) "OhShit this could be a crush!"
c) Standing in front of a guy three years your senior that you might have a vague crush on, at his invite-only graduation ball, without an invitation ... must be one of the most humiliating environments to get your crush crushed in.

All those things running through my head, in a split second. Guess what comes out of my mouth?

"Uhmmmmmhiiiiii!!!??? What are you doing here?"

And of course, after that spurt of literary genius my mind freezes up and my face pounces at the chance of perfecting its grasp of the 'mortified rictus'-set of expressions.

We ran into each other 10 years later. She offered me a lift from the train station, then kicked me out of the car in some remote part of town. Being the Soul-and-confidence-crushing-Nemesis of someone else's discovery of their Eros is ... perplexing, highly overrated and sometimes it requires astonishingly little actual action on your part. Srsly, a tendency to freeze right after you stuck your foot in your mouth and a gaggle of brainless frenemies appears fully sufficient.

Thanks, 'Friends'!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SpanielBear on 08 Feb 2018, 09:55
To be honest, I wouldn't object to someone trying to fix mine. Blergh.

My high-school 'friends' idea of "fixing my love" life was schlepping a slightly underage vague acquaintance to our graduation ball without an invitation, aiming her at me, and watching the results from a safe distance.  Moment I saw her, I realized that:
a) Those moron's idea of "fixing someone's lovelife" was pretty much: "We've seen him interacting friendly-like with her once while he was tending bar, ergo it must be twue wuv!"
b) "OhShit this could be a crush!"
c) Standing in front of a guy three years your senior that you might have a vague crush on, at his invite-only graduation ball, without an invitation ... must be one of the most humiliating environments to get your crush crushed in.

All those things running through my head, in a split second. Guess what comes out of my mouth?

"Uhmmmmmhiiiiii!!!??? What are you doing here?"

We met 10 years later. She offered me a lift from the train station, then kicked me out of the car in some remote part of town. Being the Soul-and-confidence-crushing-Nemesis of someone else's discovery of their Eros is ... perplexing, highly overrated and sometimes it requires astonishingly little actual action on your part. Srsly, a tendency to freeze right after you stuck your foot in your mouth and a gaggle of brainless frenemies is all it takes.

Thanks, 'Friends'!

That entire situation sounds utterly horrifying. Poor you. And her.

(Also, while the whole scenario sounds pretty awful, my middle-class Brit internal monologue is screaming "But that's a faux pas! In a social situation! People you are acquainted with might SEE!!! THOSE MONSTERS!!!!!"

As you can tell, my internal monologue also conforms quite happily with the Terry Pratchett theory of multiple exclamation marks.)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Case on 08 Feb 2018, 10:06
That entire situation sounds utterly horrifying. Poor you. And her.

(Also, while the whole scenario sounds pretty awful, my middle-class Brit internal monologue is screaming "But that's a faux pas! In a social situation! People you are acquainted with might SEE!!! THOSE MONSTERS!!!!!"

As you can tell, my internal monologue also conforms quite happily with the Terry Pratchett theory of multiple exclamation marks.)


Poor her, mostly - I mean ... I turned out a pro-nerd, with the standard set of social graces that usually comes with the package, so my natural strategy of 'letting someone down gently' was a) Hoping they 'get it' on their own ... somehow, with the escalation option of b) The FadeAway (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fr8HKRTavM0) (I was seriously floored when I learned that there are people who believe that The FadeAwayTM is a Girls-thing).

But I'd have kindasorta liked the chance to be loathed for my actual shortcomings, see what I mean?

The incident left me with a serious dislike for people with an inkling to play match-maker. After that, those folk mostly make me think of ... matches. Funny, huh? Can't fathom why ...  :evil:

P.S.: I confess that I seriously resented being seen as "the guy who needs to be set up". And also with a girl that I wasn't into that way, and who was three years my junior (I was 19 at the time, age of majority in Germany is 18, age of consent was 16 back then. I felt like some sort of child-molester). The half-ride-half-walk through town sorta closed that circle: Sometimes, your injured pride is not what matters most.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SpanielBear on 08 Feb 2018, 10:08
But I'd have liked to be loathed for my actual shortcomings, see what I mean?

Live the dream, man. Live the dream.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Neko_Ali on 08 Feb 2018, 10:56
Mass Effect 2 & 3, EDI and Joker. EDI is the artificial intelligence that runs their ship and Joker is the pilot. At first she's always angry at him because he's wreckless and disorderly[.]

I would think wrecklessness would be a good thing in a pilot. :-)

corrected the typo.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 08 Feb 2018, 10:58
Mass Effect 2 & 3, EDI and Joker. EDI is the artificial intelligence that runs their ship and Joker is the pilot. At first she's always angry at him because he's wreckless and disorderly[.]

I would think wrecklessness would be a good thing in a pilot. :-)
Yes, with any other ship; but here we're talking about HER body, you know!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SpanielBear on 08 Feb 2018, 11:05
Mass Effect 2 & 3, EDI and Joker. EDI is the artificial intelligence that runs their ship and Joker is the pilot. At first she's always angry at him because he's wreckless and disorderly[.]

I would think wrecklessness would be a good thing in a pilot. :-)
Yes, with any other ship; but here we're talking about HER body, you know!

To clarify, I believe this is a pun based on a spelling mistake. The original term should have been (and has been corrected to) 'reckless', which does mean foolhardy and careless. The spelling mistake, 'wreckless', changed the meaning so the sentence became "Joker has never wrecked a space-craft" (He is wreck-less). Not crashing would be a positive attribute for a pilot to have...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 08 Feb 2018, 11:12
Oh. That's as well is reading mistake from my part.
I'm sorry. Just forgot write spelling for "recklessness", so read it as it was supposed to be. :)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Case on 08 Feb 2018, 11:59

Human consciousness is, maybe, slow - it's basically an interface builded on hundreds of bugged and messy hormonal and instinctive systems, designed to long-forgotten stimules as well as current ones, and designed by a very bad designer (Mother Nature) with basic philosophy "this code worked adequatly when I submitted it, and I don't mind it's so buggy, we saving it for compatibility and support reasons"; so human consciousness just have no direct control to initiating body states.
But I can't see how "running action past a review function" is a bad thing.

Not entirely sure whether I get you correctly (or if I would agree if I did): I don't think consciousness is merely a 'review' system (Yes, it does have aspects of a review system, but ... that feels incomplete).

Consciousness 'feels' to me rather like something that initially (way back when, maybe even in one our non-human ancestors) started out as a biological equivalent to what programmers would call an "exception handling" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_handling) routine to an already existing, very fast & adaptive primary cognitive system - an emergency system that can temporarily take over when the primary system encounters a situation it cannot solve (or a situation where it is prone to coming up with bad solutions) - and from those origins, it evolved and became better until ... one day, it got the idea that it was actually running the show.

Bit like Star Trek Voyager where the Emergency Medical Hologram first becomes the regular ship doctor because the regular ship doctor is dead, and in some situation even has to stand in for the captain (or the whole crew, was it?).

I'm interested in "Thinking, fast and slow" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow) (but admit I haven't read it yet), because that's kind of how it feels to me - Science is the archetypical profession that demands "Slow down your thinking! Make your thoughts conscious!" (Srsly: At the root of it, that's even more fundamental than the Feynman-dictum (*), and that's already the "Scientific Method, in a nutshell"). But much of what I do as a physicist is not done by the slow, conscious, deliberative part of my mind - it's done by the quicksilvery "Dog chasing a stick"-part of my mind that can 'just see' a way to a solution, or completely forget time, space - even myself - during a calculation. And I am by no means convinced that I (as in 'the conscious part of myself') am the smarter of the pair, quite the opposite, in fact - it's more like ... it's way faster and smarter than I am, it has ancient wisdom, but in a funny way, it doesn't seem to be able to know what it's bad at, or when to stop. And when it looks in a mirror, it doesn't recognize itself.

I see 'my' job (again 'my' as in 'the conscious part of myself') as 'coming up with good questions for the part that is good at coming up with answers', as 'giving the dog a good scent and then getting out of its way'. When it comes back, my part starts again - looking at what the dog dragged up (patting its head, Good! Dog!)

And I think that another of the original functions of the conscious fraction of our mind was simulating another (proto-)human being. Suppose that for some reason - facilitating group interaction, predicting reactions of other group members, to stave of loneliness and despair, whatever - our brains found themselves in need of being able to speak to another, simulated human being, a mirror of sorts, in some situations. The 'exception handler' applied for the job and got it - and ... got good at it.

(And one day, it got this weird idea that it was actually running the show and all the rest was merely ... the bywork.)

Only then, all the other brains had their own 'simulated internal humans', too - probably the point we started inventing art in order not to go crazy.  :-D


(*) "You must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest to fool"
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Case on 08 Feb 2018, 12:26
Regarding the whole 'arousal/embarrassment/shame'-debate:

<whole 'arousal/embarrassment/shame'-debate>

Some minor quibbles:

1) Human physical signs of arousal are not always coupled to an actual experience of arousal - Every guy past puberty knows that (Well, unless I'm the only dude on Earth who wakes with morning wood, yet breathing quite normally and thinking more of going for a wee rather than, say, a raging urge to either masturbate or search the premises for any potential mating partners that may happen to be around and/or have snuck into his flat overnight). Men get raging erections in the most impossible of situations, feeling exactly zero sexual arousal - the 'combat boner' is an example (That's actually part of how men absolutely can get raped - same as how a woman doesn't enjoy and/or consent to intercourse whenever her body decides it's time to get wet). And that's talking about what is probably the simpler part of the species.

2) IIRC, Human children start displaying signs of shame long before they first experience sexual arousal - Kids ban their parents (and especially the 'desire target'-parent) from the bathroom long before puberty.

3) We've heard that AI's can experience a sort of VR-sex amongst each other. If that is sex in any definition we would recognize, it involves at least the simulated experience of sensual stimuli and involuntary reactions, regardless of whether their everyday 'chassis' are capable of experiencing those sensations.

4) RetCon: Bubbles chassis is a recent experimental model. Maybe someone at Skunkworks got tired of designing horny little psychopaths with built-in lasers who are way too much into niche human fetishes for their own good, and decided that "if the bugger are so keen on it, they should start making their own kink"?

5) RetCon: Humans are smart apes, but apes we are. No matter what we do, our first basic questions are always "Can it eats me?" "Can I eats it?" "Can I mate with it?". There's something funny - and comforting - in knowing that at least 5-15% of our most recent paradigm-shattering invention The! Internet! is dedicated exclusively to pron. Even someone as otherworldly as AI-inventor Chatham would have expected that at some point, AI would be put into human-form chassis, and from there, it's a giant leap for AI-kind but a quick stroke for ... (trying to come up with a good way to end that one).

So it would make sense that the people who wrote the first versions of AI "sensual faculty software .dll's" would add at least some placeholder entries for 'sexual pleasure' (or even approximations), even if the bodies capable of feeling those sensations didn't yet exist - simply because knowing their fellow humans, they knew those bodies would exist at some point.

TL;DR - It's not impossible for Bubbles to feel shame without feeling arousal. It's not impossible for Bubbles to feel aroused even if her body would (yet) lack all the sensory faculties for lovemaking.


P.S.: Are you familiar with Neal Asher's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neal_Asher) Polity Universe? I think you might like them. There's a type of "AI" called Golem that kind of fits some of your ideas - an android chassis with a non-organic cognitive core that can be host to both 'natural' AI's as well as recorded human minds (Asher subtly hint that over time, the difference may start to become less and less important). The trick with the Golem's is that the chassis run an emulation of human basic emotion and also mimick other human peculiarities - pretending that their joints have the same range as ours when they don't, gait, sweat, body odor, etc.

He keeps coming back to the question of "how real simulated emotion is" over several books, culminating in one part where a formerly human side-character is re-awakened after death into an AI chassis, with the ability to switch off his human emotions - and starts wondering not how human he is, but how real his identity is. Is he still the real Gant that he feels he is, when he knows he is so different, so much more in some respects.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 08 Feb 2018, 13:29
Quote
Not entirely sure whether I get you correctly (or if I would agree if I did): I don't think consciousness is merely a 'review' system (Yes, it does have aspects of a review system, but ... that feels incomplete).

Consciousness 'feels' to me rather like something that initially (way back when, maybe even in one our non-human ancestors) started out as a biological equivalent to what programmers would call an "exception handling" routine to an already existing, very fast & adaptive primary cognitive system - an emergency system that can temporarily take over when the primary system encounters a situation it cannot solve (or a situation where it is prone to coming up with bad solutions) - and from those origins, it evolved and became better until ... one day, it got the idea that it was actually running the show.

AFAIK it's true. Consciousness is, in a nutshell (very, very small nutshell) a system allowing to break a program (instinct) and find a way to solve a problem. It's not faster or slower that any other part by mechanism, but it's far more distracted, and have very little resource in its disposal. You can make your consciousness work fast - you'll just need to concentrate it on "this particular problem" to solve. And it's actually very difficult skill, and very tiresome one. And, as we haven't full control, we can't actually drag out every problem into consciousness.
Mental trauma is interesting example. It actually "heal itself" slowly (as nothing really happens "itself" this meaning it healing itself subconsciously). Consciousness approach, if you have correct skills and able to defeat the suffering in process, is FAR faster.
Or take learning process. As people gasp learning skills and required concentration, learning became far faster with consciousness approach.
Thing with subconscious is that it uses shortcuts. Consciousness can use it as well, as long as you have skills. I mean, it's like... "Subconscious is very fast in math. You just need to look into nightsky, and it's already done - there are a lot of stars here!"

Regarding the whole 'arousal/embarrassment/shame'-debate:

But to answer you question "How do AI's have uncontrolled emotional responses" (I think I've got that right?) with "Because Magic" would be completely unsatisfying.
Sorry, no, you haven't got that exactly right.
Question is "How do AIs have uncontrolled emotional responses by every detail resembling human sexual arousment."
Because if there is a emotion that have less social component that direct sexual arousment, I don't know it. It can be emulated, sure - but WHO emulate it in Bubbles?

Some minor quibbles:

1) Human physical signs of arousal are not always coupled to an actual experience of arousal - Every guy past puberty knows that (Well, unless I'm the only dude who wakes with morning wood and doesn't have to suppress the raging urge to either masturbate or have sex with an available and willing partner that happens to be around). Men get raging erections in the most impossible of situations, feeling exactly zero sexual arousal - the 'combat boner' is an example. And that's talking about what is probably the simpler part of the species.

2) IIRC, Human children start displaying signs of shame long before they first experience sexual arousal - Kids ban their parents (and especially the 'desire target'-parent) from the bathroom long before puberty.

3) We've heard that AI's can experience a sort of VR-sex amongst each other. If that is sex in any definition we would recognize, it involves at least the simulated experience of sensual stimuli and involuntary reactions, regardless of whether their bodies are capable of experiencing those sensations.

4) RetCon: Bubbles chassis is a recent experimental model. Maybe someone at Skunkworks got tired of designing horny little psychopaths with built-in lasers who are way too much into niche human fetishes for their own good, and decided that "if the bugger are so keen on it, they should start making their own kink"?

5) RetCon: Humans are smart apes, but apes we are. No matter what we do, our first basic questions are always "Can it eats me?" "Can I eats it?" "Can I mate with it?". There's something funny - and comforting - in knowing that at least 5-15% of our most recent paradigm-shattering invention The! Internet! is dedicated exclusively to pron. Even someone as otherworldly as AI-inventor Chatham would have expected that at some point, AI would be put into human-form chassis, and from there, it's a giant leap for AI-kind but a quick stroke for ... (trying to come up with a good way to end that one).

So it would make sense that the people who wrote the first versions of AI "sensual faculty software .dll's" would add at least some placeholder entries for 'sexual pleasure' (or even approximations), even if the bodies capable of feeling those sensations didn't yet exist - simply because knowing their fellow humans, they knew those bodies would exist at some point.

TL;DR - It's not impossible for Bubbles to feel shame without feeling arousal. It's not impossible for Bubbles to feel aroused even if her body would (yet) lack all the sensory faculties for lovemaking.
Well... again, it's complicated.
1) About "most impossible situations to have erections". The very problem with human body is that we haven't any hormone with only one task. My favorite example is oxytocin. Look into wiki to a list of tasks!
How do erection work, with a great simplification? Humans have enzyme, horrible molecule called cyclic guanosine monophosphate. There are receptors in human blood system that have a simple program - "if cGMP hit you, wide blood vessel". And cGMP is synthesized normally, and degrading with another horrible molecule, phosphodiesterase. Phosphodiesterase V (PDE-5) is concentrated in pelvic cavity and supposed to destroy cGMP as fast as it needed. If sexual arousal happen, PDE-5 synthesis get low, pelvic cavity organs (including corpus cavernosum) had their blood vessels widen, blood pressure up, voila - erection.
Imagine by some incident you have cGMP synthesis rise or PDE-5 synthesis low. PDE-5 wouldn't be enough to destroy cGMP. That's how Viagra works, by the way, it inhibit PDE-5 synthesis. Voila - erection.
Problem is, cGMP also using in apoptosis (by-designed death for cells in the body), AND in translation light into electricity in your eyes, AND in fight-and-flight reaction. And body is stupid. It never can access situation. "cGMP level rise = erection".
Biochemistry is fun, but EXTREMELY messy. So yeah, not every erection is arousal. And not every oxytocin blast is arousal. And not every nipple erection is arousal.
2) Yes, because children are teached to do this things, it's not instinctive reaction.
3) We actually do know mechanism. It's high-speed package exchange.
4) Continuity error: It was directly declared that Pintsize program and Bubble program was running parallel, and Pintsize's one was closed for humanitarian reasons. 
5) Definitely possible, and I believe was done. But then it's the same thing with robotic drunkenness. In a nutshell, as far it was shown, it's a reaction that AI summons on himself consciously. "I want to be drunk for social reasons, so I'm downgrading processor cycles and apps I have would initiate "drunk" behavior".
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Cornelius on 08 Feb 2018, 13:41
This is a very interesting exchange, which I'll gladly follow in the morning. However, as to point two, I do think that that particular example is cultural/social. Which does not mean that children do not develop shame before arousal. But that's a bit of a slippery point, as we should properly define what we mean by shame. A study I read a couple of months ago posited that shame is simply a manifestation of fear.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Is it cold in here? on 08 Feb 2018, 14:46
Quote
Only then, all the other brains had their own 'simulated internal humans', too - probably the point we started inventing art in order not to go crazy

Hasn't worked very well judging from the number of artists who are crazy.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 08 Feb 2018, 15:00
Quote
Only then, all the other brains had their own 'simulated internal humans', too - probably the point we started inventing art in order not to go crazy

Hasn't worked very well judging from the number of artists who are crazy.

Actually, I always thought that artists are people who actually hearing.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Case on 08 Feb 2018, 15:56
Quote
Not entirely sure whether I get you correctly (or if I would agree if I did): I don't think consciousness is merely a 'review' system (Yes, it does have aspects of a review system, but ... that feels incomplete).
...

AFAIK it's true. Consciousness is, in a nutshell (very, very small nutshell) a system allowing to break a program (instinct) and find a way to solve a problem. It's not faster or slower that any other part by mechanism, but it's far more distracted, and have very little resource in its disposal. You can make your consciousness work fast - you'll just need to concentrate it on "this particular problem" to solve. And it's actually very difficult skill, and very tiresome one. And, as we haven't full control, we can't actually drag out every problem into consciousness.
Mental trauma is interesting example. It actually "heal itself" slowly (as nothing really happens "itself" this meaning it healing itself subconsciously). Consciousness approach, if you have correct skills and able to defeat the suffering in process, is FAR faster.
Or take learning process. As people gasp learning skills and required concentration, learning became far faster with consciousness approach.
Thing with subconscious is that it uses shortcuts. Consciousness can use it as well, as long as you have skills. I mean, it's like... "Subconscious is very fast in math. You just need to look into nightsky, and it's already done - there are a lot of stars here!"

What do you believe to be true? My amateur thoughts about consciousness? Your prior thoughts about consciousness? //
I don't think 'instinct' is a concept that is used anymore wrt. to human - I think I vaguely remember that we don't have any, or only a handful, and they are important only for a very short time in our lives. A human baby will not walk in minutes, an elephant baby will. The latter is called 'instinct'. Yeah, that one is actually Case talking when he should have been checking https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instinct //
I don't know if consciousness is faster or slower or more distracted than any other parts of our minds - it always figured it was so fundamentally different from the other parts, and it's job so fundamentally more difficult than the others, that it was never intended to be anything but 'slow'. The jobs that consciousness might possibly tasked with solving are potentially infinite - it's impossible to optimize such a function, since you cannot know which tools it may or may not require. //
I can speed up conscious processes by focussing more, agreed. //
I guess it would be difficult skill, since it's job description is "Solve any potential problem that any human might potentially encounter in the Universe". //
I don't know if there are specific problems, or classes of problems that we can or cannot draw into our consciousness - in my 'amateur model' of consciousness as 'emergency problem solver', that wouldn't be necessary, since the emergency problem solver would only be activated when the rest of the brain can't solve the problem.
 But we a have a workaround that particular problem of 'problems that might need dragging but we may not know which' - it's called 'other humans'.//
I am not sure what you mean by 'consciousness approach' - what little I know of learning suggests that we get faster the more parts of the problem-solving skill become automated and thereby unconscious. //
I am not sure what you mean by 'shortcuts' //
If by skills you mean 'aquired skills', then yes. My trained 44yo brain still goes step by step when doing math, and it doesn't feel like I have become faster, but I know that my steps have become far bigger than the used to when be when I was 28, or 36.  //
Do you mean Savantism, or intuitive leaps?

Forgive my asking - Do you have any formal training in neurosciences, psychiatry, behavioural science or similar? It's very hard to tell from your 'tone'. If you were a native speaker of English, I'd say you're tone would suggest a confidence that hints at formal training, but since you're not a native speaker, I can't tell if you're speculating (like I was, and hinted at the fact with 'to me, it feels ...'), or whether you're drawing on a body of secured scientific work.

Either would be perfectly fine, it just changes the pace of the game a bit.

Regarding the whole 'arousal/embarrassment/shame'-debate:

Some minor quibbles:
...
3) We've heard that AI's can experience a sort of VR-sex amongst each other. If that is sex in any definition we would recognize, it involves at least the simulated experience of sensual stimuli and involuntary reactions, regardless of whether their bodies are capable of experiencing those sensations.
...
TL;DR - It's not impossible for Bubbles to feel shame without feeling arousal. It's not impossible for Bubbles to feel aroused even if her body would (yet) lack all the sensory faculties for lovemaking.
Well... again, it's complicated.
1) About "most impossible situations to have erections". The very problem with human body is that we haven't any hormone with only one task. My favorite example is oxytocin. Look into wiki to a list of tasks!
How do erection work, with a great simplification? [...]
Biochemistry is fun, but EXTREMELY messy. So yeah, not every erection is arousal. And not every oxytocin blast is arousal. And not every nipple erection is arousal.
2) Yes, because children are teached to do this things, it's not instinctive reaction.
3) We actually do know mechanism. It's high-speed package exchange.
4) Continuity error: It was directly declared that Pintsize program and Bubble program was running parallel, and Pintsize's one was closed for humanitarian reasons. 
5) Definitely possible, and I believe was done. But then it's the same thing with robotic drunkenness. In a nutshell, as far it was shown, it's a reaction that AI summons on himself consciously. "I want to be drunk for social reasons, so I'm downgrading processor cycles and apps I have would initiate "drunk" behavior".

1) Informative and we are agreed -> "Biochemistry is fun, but EXTREMELY messy. So yeah, not every erection is arousal. And not every oxytocin blast is arousal. And not every nipple erection is arousal." Not every physical sign of arousal in humans is a reliable indicator that the mind in the body experiences sexual arousal. I don't see why this should be different in AIs? Or should it?

(Again my question: Formal training in Biochem? Sounds a bit like it.)

2) Not sure about the 'they are taught to do those things'. See also Cornelius' post. But that's a minor point: Let's suppose that human 'learn' the 'shame of their nakedness' (not sure here: In German, the respective term is literally 'scham', i.e. 'shame'). Do you think that Bubbles has learned her 'shame of (Faye's partial) nakedness'? If so/if not, why do you think so? Asked jocularly: "What is the problem here?"

3) Uhmmmhyes. Does that make a difference to my point 3) What did you think of my point 3), if anything?

4) Agreed.

5) Agreed ... almost. If AI's can consciously simulate the effects of drunkeness, how does it make the internal experience different from the human one - other than probably being cheaper, and having less adverse health effects? It may be unfair to us, but that doesn't make them less drunk, or does it? Did I maybe miss something you already discussed? I'll try to catch up more thoroughly tomorrow.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 08 Feb 2018, 16:47
Quote
What do you believe to be true? My amateur thoughts about consciousness? Your prior thoughts about consciousness? //
Both. :) I meant yes, by no means consciousness is merely a 'review' system.

Quote
I don't know if consciousness is faster or slower or more distracted than any other parts of our minds
You can't actually distract non-consciousness reactions. Well, you can (very powerful physical pain can break appetite, for instance), but it's should be something really powerful.

Quote
I am not sure what you mean by 'consciousness approach' - what little I know of learning suggests that we get faster the more parts of the problem-solving skill become automated and thereby unconscious. //
Consciousness approach to learning is a situation where you know you're learning and know what are you learning. There is, for instance, gaming learning, which works well on little children who can't sustain attention span for "traditional" approaches.

Quote
I am not sure what you mean by 'shortcuts'
Shortcuts is simplifications and skipping turns. I mean, it require a hard training to intuitively operate astronomical distances or geological times - because subconscious always trying to short it into "very far" or "long ago". Consciousness do it as well, but it's quite faster to teach consciousness to operate such data.

Quote
Forgive my asking - Do you have any formal training in neurosciences, psychiatry, behavioural science or similar?
Microsociology, basic specialization - subcultures, thesis theme - USSR subculture building.

Quote
1) Informative and we are agreed -> "Biochemistry is fun, but EXTREMELY messy. So yeah, not every erection is arousal. And not every oxytocin blast is arousal. And not every nipple erection is arousal." Not every physical sign of arousal in humans is a reliable indicator that the mind in the body experiences sexual arousal. I don't see why this should be different in AIs? Or should it?

(Again my question: Formal training in Biochem? Sounds a bit like it.)
It actually shouldn't, as I said somewhere before. Question is then, if it isn't arousal Bubbles shows, what is it, and why do her reaction so mirroring human reaction about arousal display?
(and not exactly - but sociology means hours of psychology, and psychology means basics of biochem)

Quote
2) Not sure about the 'they are taught to do those things'. I'm not a parent, but I've heard e.g. fathers reporting "My daughter was 5 (6, whatever) when she banned me from the bathroom", implying very much that it was not the parent teaching the child to be ashamed, but the child telling the parent "Go!". I remember being younger than ten years of age when my parents being naked in front of me-, or my being naked in front of them, started to bother me. I do not recall anybody teaching me to feel that way, it just felt that way.
No, it's not "parents actually demands from their children to do it". But the most neglected thing in pedagogic is ignoring a fact that a child is a sapient being capable to self-learning and self-changing. :)
First of all, at 6-7 years child already learned that nudity isn't exactly always ok. They were explained about it, and they noticing that parents (and other grown-ups) don't actually going around nude.
Second, and even more difficult thing is that 6-year child have a crisis, not so different as teenage crisis. That's when personal space need and recalculating of relationships happens. Being nude, especially in the bathroom, is ringing "it's not safe".
I'm not sure what to offer as a source - this theme is quite nicely developed in Russian psychology, started by Lev Vygotsky, but I don't know English sources or even how this stage is correctly named in English.

Quote
Do you think that Bubbles has learned her 'shame of (Faye's partial) nakedness'? If so/if not, why do you think so? Asked jocularly: "What is the problem here?"
I'd say it's not a shame of nakedness, but shame of showing emotions. She got X (arousal or some substitute reaction), such display is shunned, she is not well, she asking Faye to remove source of emotion (and appeal to social norm, by the way, because it's a safe way to dodge responsibility).
Imagine some kind of court in her head, with a prosecutor saying - "she is displaying arousal! it's not good! let's sentence her to feel shame!". And attorney answering - "not her fault, Your Honor! It's Faye' faux pas!"

Quote
3) Uhmmmhyes. Does that make a difference to my point 3) What did you think of my point 3), if anything?
Oh sorry.
As far as I can tell, robosex is actually exchange of packages about personal info and code, and we know it's quite intimate theme for AI. They called it "robotic sex" not because it's including sensual stimulation, but because it has a place in their society that resembling a place sex has in our.

Quote
If AI's can consciously simulate the effects of drunkeness, how does it make the internal experience different from the human one - other than probably being cheaper, and having less adverse health effects.
Human can't choose. For human state of drunkeness is a inevitable state happens because they're drinking alcohol. They can want drunkeness (as Faye or Marten after "The Talk"), they can like a taste of spirits, they can drink for a company. They can't became drunk or sober with a snap of fingers.
Did you read "Good Omens" by Prattchet and Gaiman? There is an episode there, where angel and demon drinking.
"A look of pain crossed the angel's suddenly very serious face.
"I can't cope with this while 'm drunk," he said. "I'm going to sober up."
"Me too.""
That's something AI can do, and human can't.
So if for human being drunk is an uncontrollable consequence of some activity, for AI it's a game - it's voluntarily, conscious and optional rule they impose on themselves and can drop it any second.

P.S. Oh, and about Savantism, or intuitive leaps (sorry for missing it first time).
That's quite difficult themes, because here we actually can speculate only. Intuitive leaps, as far as I believe (there are dozens of another theories) is actually overload effect, when problem just "don't fit" into consciousness RAM, but also is very important for said consciousness. Then it's "consciousness loading some outer RAM with same task".
Savantism is even more hard, because by very state savant has we can't communicate nicely to learn a lot about their self-reflexion.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: traroth on 08 Feb 2018, 17:15
Jeph is SUCH a tease.  :laugh: :lol:

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_AI-GWGu8YmE/SHy3ZRb1qZI/AAAAAAAABMc/ZmvtYkyYv-Y/s400/o_rly_original.jpg)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: TheEvilDog on 08 Feb 2018, 17:34
Around and around and around and around and around and around we go.

This whole discussion is just sinking into the depths of infinity and ad nauseum.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Tova on 08 Feb 2018, 17:55
I think this is a fine place to end this story arc, at least for now. I hope to see a new storyline in the next comic. And/or shenanigans.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Perfectly Reasonable on 08 Feb 2018, 18:03
Thanks to you folks, I am now imagining a love lorn toaster. Who is very proud of the toast it makes. But is there something more? And now plush chairs enter the picture...

Am I on the verge of understanding Pintsize? (backs away hurriedly)

Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: MrNumbers on 08 Feb 2018, 18:10
Dale is just kind of the best isn't he?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SpanielBear on 08 Feb 2018, 18:11
Quote
2) Not sure about the 'they are taught to do those things'. I'm not a parent, but I've heard e.g. fathers reporting "My daughter was 5 (6, whatever) when she banned me from the bathroom", implying very much that it was not the parent teaching the child to be ashamed, but the child telling the parent "Go!". I remember being younger than ten years of age when my parents being naked in front of me-, or my being naked in front of them, started to bother me. I do not recall anybody teaching me to feel that way, it just felt that way.

No, it's not "parents actually demands from their children to do it". But the most neglected thing in pedagogic is ignoring a fact that a child is a sapient being capable to self-learning and self-changing. :)
First of all, at 6-7 years child already learned that nudity isn't exactly always ok. They were explained about it, and they noticing that parents (and other grown-ups) don't actually going around nude.
Second, and even more difficult thing is that 6-year child have a crisis, not so different as teenage crisis. That's when personal space need and recalculating of relationships happens. Being nude, especially in the bathroom, is ringing "it's not safe".
I'm not sure what to offer as a source - this theme is quite nicely developed in Russian psychology, started by Lev Vygotsky, but I don't know English sources or even how this stage is correctly named in English.

So, I stopped replying to this thread because while it is fascinating, it was going into areas that I know next to nothing about. My background is philosophy and ersatz psychotherapy (like mental health first aid rather than a degree, I'm definitely not a psychotherapist), and when the discussion moved into the biochemical side I felt happier sitting it out.

But it is fascinating. And there are some points raised here that I think I can jump in on, so here goes.

As far as infant psychology is concerned, there is almost an embarrassment of riches in the western psychological canon, from Freud and Jung through to Melanie Klein and John Bowlby. Again, I'm not an expert here so take what I say with a pinch of salt, but I don't see a huge amount of difference between what you describe and what I understand the basic strokes to be from an English language perspective. I guess though that the developmental stage you are describing is similar to the idea that the experience of becoming aware of oneself as a separate entity to others is both liberating and terrifying. The point at which children discover that their parents are fallible and possibly a threat (your mother stops just feeding you whenever and yells at you when you get angry. Terrifying!), that their needs will not always be met by others, and that they can keep secrets from their parents is a big deal, and is normally described as happening in development terms between the ages of 6 months to 6 years. So that kind of tallies. And yes, it is an awareness that seems to be learned through experience rather than instinctual, and that learning is to a greater or lesser degree unconscious.

If we try and extrapolate that learning process into the development of an AI personality- well, we don't actually have much to go on. We don't know how they're grown, so we don't know whether they go through developmental stages (is something like Eliza the equivalent of an AI newborn? Or are their developmental stages the same as ours but sped up? Do they have attachment figures? How much of their psychology is a pre-programmed function and how much is emergent? Too many questions, not enough evidence for an answer), so trying to draw out comparisons with humanity doesn't really work. If an AI doesn't have a father who can be naked, is there a machine equivalent? "I saw Dad slowing his run-time last night- Gross!"

And then we add *another* layer of complication, because now they have to interact with humanity as well. So that's two layers of socialisation and existential games to have to navigate. Human-centred AI's are not omniscient, they make mistakes about human feelings and intentions which they have to learn to correct, so that seems to indicate that they do not get "Interacting with humans 101" as a simple download. When it comes to us, they try to mimic our ways as much as possible.

Which means I think we come back to the functionality thing again. If Bubbles only wanted to socialise with other robots, she would have no need to go through the difficulty of learning how to interact with humans. Because she does, she is forced to translate her robot psychology into terms that humans can relate to. This could go the other way, and presumably the study of AI psychology would be a thing as we try to do just that, relate to robots on their terms. But for the day to day, it seems far easier for the AI's to translate their inner experiences in terms of human psychology and feeling. And that communication is presumably facilitated by both the software and the hardware they use- Software might give bubbles mastery of the English language, but another package designed to run with her specific chassis may also provide body language cues. And as we know that AI's have unconscious processes in a similar way that we do, it's not inconceivable that they have unconscious behaviours and displays that they aren't immediately aware of.



Quote
As far as I can tell, robosex is actually exchange of packages about personal info and code, and we know it's quite intimate theme for AI. They called it "robotic sex" not because it's including sensual stimulation, but because it has a place in their society that resembling a place sex has in our.

In fairness, there is no indication that robo-sex *doesn't* include sensual stimulation. They get an emotional intimacy sure, but looking at Pintsize before and after his date back in the early comics he certainly seemed to have experienced stimulation of some kind. And I seem to recall Momo having a very... immediate reaction to a shirtless Sven (I think? I can't remember where it is in the archives. I recall there being startled pony-tail motion...). In short, when AI seek romance, they definitely can include erotic love as a part of that desire. I don't see any indication that their lust is anything other than raw, as opposed to an intellectual satisfaction. Bubbles' desire for Faye covers a broad spectrum. She loves the emotional connection they have, for sure, but there is something more that she wants and all the signs point to that want being lust-based, at least in part.

Quote
Human can't choose. For human state of drunkeness is a inevitable state happens because they're drinking alcohol. They can want drunkeness (as Faye or Marten after "The Talk"), they can like a taste of spirits, they can drink for a company. They can't became drunk or sober with a snap of fingers.
Do you read "Good Omens" by Prattchet and Gaiman? There is an episode there, where angel and demon drinking.
"A look of pain crossed the angel's suddenly very serious face.
"I can't cope with this while 'm drunk," he said. "I'm going to sober up."
"Me too.""
That's something AI can do, and human can't.
So if for human being drunk is an uncontrollable consequence of some activity, for AI it's a game - it's voluntarily, conscious and optional rule they impose on themselves and can drop it any second.

I'm not sure about that. In theory certainly that's true. An AI runs programme:Drunk until it decides end programme:Drunk. But saying that decision is voluntary, conscious and optional is like saying a human choosing to drink is voluntary, conscious and optional. That choice seems to be an open one, but in fact can be driven by all sorts of unconscious desires and emotional drives, to the extent that the choice we have is very limited. If Station were to want to reduce it's run time to avoid something disturbing, it could use the Drunk programme to facilitate that. It's conceivable that it could rationalise the choice to start drinking with a thought similar to "This will help me cope, I can stop whenever I like", but if the disturbing emotion was bad enough it may feel unable to end the programme- it could be too scared, the experience too potentially painful. A robot alcoholic is not an impossible thing to conceive of- It could cure itself, but for whatever reason doesn't feel able to. If we hypothesize a robot subconscious, it may not even know it's motivations for that.

Bringing this back to Bubbles again- why might she want to run Programme:Arousal despite the social and emotional implications of that choice? Well, it may just feel good. It feels *nice* to be aroused, that's kind of the purpose. It's only when we start adding social mores and taboos on top of that that it becomes complicated. Bubbles shows real difficulty admitting to her own desires, to anything really that isn't logical. Part of her development is allowing herself to express those feelings. But to her, some of her feelings- grief, loss, confusion- are so overwhelming that avoiding them is an act of self-defence. And if some emotions are that hard to face, to make conscious, she might feel the same about others- if one snake is poisonous, all become suspect until proven otherwise. So her subconscious may be running her arousal programme on repeat, but she sure as hell isn't going to work too hard to reflect on that fact, because that would risk ending up vulnerable to other sources of psychological pain. This is a paradox- she is feeling something, but can't admit to herself that she is feeling it.

But there is a workaround. By throwing herself into the learned behaviours, she can maintain a herself in a place where she feels arousal but is not obliged to act on it, and can dismiss her inner tension as social anxiety. As the subject of all these emotions is Faye, a human, the only way she can get the object of her arousal to behave in the way she needs is to communicate with her, and she uses the human/AI emotional translator to do it.

Dammit, I just armchair psychologied a combat AI, didn't I? God I love QC.  :-)

EDIT: I think I am going to copy this over to the thread you started, and continue there if you have no objection. The weekly comic seems to have shifted focus, and I can go on about this stuff for ages if I'm not careful.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SpanielBear on 08 Feb 2018, 18:20
I think this is a fine place to end this story arc, at least for now. I hope to see a new storyline in the next comic. And/or shenanigans.

Shenanigans! Mere Shenanigans!? This is high drama of the utmost import! DALE HAS SHAVED!!!!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Aenno on 08 Feb 2018, 18:21
Thanks to you folks, I am now imagining a love lorn toaster. Who is very proud of the toast it makes. But is there something more? And now plush chairs enter the picture...

Am I on the verge of understanding Pintsize? (backs away hurriedly)
That's not my fault!
Plush chairs was a topic of Marten wet dream in a course of a comics, and AI put into toaster was an example Bubbles used to explain ways to modify AIs.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Perfectly Reasonable on 08 Feb 2018, 18:46
I will now indulge myself by repeating my head canon on AI:

1) AI is very much an emergent phenomenon and very poorly understood. There seems to be a great deal of randomness involved.

2) Generating a new AI is computationally expensive (like minting bitcoins) and not something you can do in your basement. I expect there are fewer than 20 super computers in the world that are capable of doing this.

3) Once you have created an AI, you have an obligation to it. You cannot delete it, or shove it into a virtual world. It must be given the same potential for existence as a meatsack intelligence. (From the famous speech before the U.N. :   Not masters. Not slaves. Equals.)

So if you try to program an AI for a specific task, you are likely to end up with garbage that does not even compile, let alone run in a meaningful way. Keep trying, and you -may- get what you want .... along with a bunch of quirky AIs that you will need to place ... somewhere.

Speculating on how AIs might be programmed to react to certain stimuli is interesting ----
but speculative. For instance, AIs were not programmed to have libidos. (And they are not about to give them up.)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: TheEvilDog on 08 Feb 2018, 19:23
Eh, new comic.

Let the screams begin in 5, 4, 3, 2...and go!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Tova on 08 Feb 2018, 19:46
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhh?
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: zisraelsen on 08 Feb 2018, 19:51
I don't know the name of it, but I love the white-background thing Jeph has started doing. It feels like the webcomic equivalent of a super-deadpan punchline delivery.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: OldGoat on 08 Feb 2018, 19:59
Jeph's been feeling the need to let his inner manga artist out to play.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: shanejayell on 08 Feb 2018, 20:01
Yay Coffee of Doom!

I also hope we see the library again. Been awhile.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Toe on 08 Feb 2018, 20:33
We interrupt your regularly scheduled thread to bring you Stoats!

(https://i.imgur.com/CfUMAOz.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/TKp5JNe.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/5TnHQcQ.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/YUtO1pQ.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/0DxWPgq.jpg)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SpanielBear on 08 Feb 2018, 20:36
OH MY GOD THEY ARE ADORABLE!!!!

*Ahem*

I mean, nice muscovid. Kudos.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: foolsguinea on 08 Feb 2018, 20:37
Whoa. I remember these characters. From a long time ago.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: sitnspin on 08 Feb 2018, 20:54
I will admit that I forgot Emily worked at the coffee shop.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Tova on 08 Feb 2018, 21:05
OH MY GOD THEY ARE ADORABLE!!!!

*Ahem*

I mean, nice muscovid. Kudos.

I, too, would like to report that I made various polite and dignified sounds of approval while viewing the stoats.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: cloudatlatl on 08 Feb 2018, 21:18
I smiled a whole lot at the new comic today and I just want to establish that I liked it a whole lot before I pick on one little thing.

Has Dora... lost her look? I'm not sure what makes her Dora anymore.  In the first panel I thought she was Emily, until Emily showed up.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Tova on 08 Feb 2018, 21:39
Yes her look has changed significantly (http://questionablecontent.wikia.com/wiki/Dora_Bianchi?file=Dora2200.png) recently. I've been suffering the same problem.

To me, she looks like a 12-14 year-old girl in today's comic.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Timemaster on 08 Feb 2018, 22:22
Around and around and around and around and around and around we go.

This whole discussion is just sinking into the depths of infinity and ad nauseum.

Yes, that pretty much sums it up for me, too. That's why i stopped reading this thread on tuesday.
But enough of that. Let's quit this rather boring storyline and return to something far more interesting: Shenanigans in CoD!  :-D

Manga style!
Chibi characters!
Yaaayyy!!!


Oh, I love this so much. A perfect strip to end the week and give me something I can return to over the weekend every once in a while for a quick re-read.

Timemaster
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: BenRG on 08 Feb 2018, 23:16
You can go so many places in your imagination with today's strip. Was it a consequence of Dale and Emily both being gamers that they do everything like bits out of one game or another? Or was it just Dora anticipating a fight (the way that Faye and Raven would have in years of yore) and then remembering that Dale and Emily are both far more relaxed, generous and, dare I say it, socially healthy?

Either way, you can tell that Jeph was apparently been on a Mortal Kombat kick when he drew this strip!
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: gopher on 08 Feb 2018, 23:45
Woohoo! Laughs ahoy.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: TinPenguin on 09 Feb 2018, 00:31
A moment of silence for Dale's scraggly-beard-thing.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: traroth on 09 Feb 2018, 00:55
Rolling joke, I said...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: BenRG on 09 Feb 2018, 01:11
A moment of silence for Dale's scraggly-beard-thing.

I can't help but wonder if Marigold might be behind this innovation.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: traroth on 09 Feb 2018, 02:24
A moment of silence for Dale's scraggly-beard-thing.

Yeah, he shaved, it seems...
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: NemesisDancer on 09 Feb 2018, 03:04
Yay, Dale and Emily! :D Emily's T-shirt has got me wondering whether Stoats are an in-universe sports team (or possibly a band) or whether she just really likes stoats. Knowing Emily I'd assume probably the latter.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: JoeCovenant on 09 Feb 2018, 03:07
I smiled a whole lot at the new comic today and I just want to establish that I liked it a whole lot before I pick on one little thing.

Has Dora... lost her look? I'm not sure what makes her Dora anymore.  In the first panel I thought she was Emily, until Emily showed up.

My exact thoughts!
There has definitely been a bit of playing around with character models in the recent weeks.
(That and overall art style, thickness of line etc...)

I think Mssr Jaques is just experimenting with things (as he has since the strip began, I suppose!) but some of the little changes have been a bit jarring recently.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Gyrre on 09 Feb 2018, 05:04
The last time I checked, the U.S. consensus is that the ideally sexually arousing woman has the face of a twelve-year-old girl, the breasts of a nursing mother, and the body of a boy athlete.

Please include source citations when making such claims.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Case on 09 Feb 2018, 05:46
The last time I checked, the U.S. consensus is that the ideally sexually arousing woman has the face of a twelve-year-old girl, the breasts of a nursing mother, and the body of a boy athlete.

Please include source citations when making such claims.

Every second visual ad that hits your retina et. al., Journal of Sexual Medicine, 8, 635, 2018

DOI: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2017.12.015

Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: War Sparrow on 09 Feb 2018, 10:32
I am glad I am not alone in squeaking about stoats. As a former ferret owner, any and all mustelidae fill me with glee.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: SpanielBear on 09 Feb 2018, 11:10
I am glad I am not alone in squeaking about stoats. As a former ferret owner, any and all mustelidae fill me with glee.

It's good you are squeaking plainly. Better than weasel words.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: War Sparrow on 09 Feb 2018, 11:23
If I hadn't been honest, you would have ferreted it out of me.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: brasca on 09 Feb 2018, 11:48
And now for something completely different.

Maybe this arc will keep up with the drama and possibly revisit Cossette or Penelope.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: ToodleLew on 09 Feb 2018, 14:38
I am glad I am not alone in squeaking about stoats. As a former ferret owner, any and all mustelidae fill me with glee.

Stoat? Dralm da**it, I read that as Stout, and was wondering which beer it was. :roll:
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: cesium133 on 09 Feb 2018, 17:40
It turns out that Emily is a fan of UW-Stoat's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Wisconsin%E2%80%93Stout) athletic teams.  :clairedoge:
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Neko_Ali on 09 Feb 2018, 18:14
I am glad I am not alone in squeaking about stoats. As a former ferret owner, any and all mustelidae fill me with glee.

Stoat? Dralm da**it, I read that as Stout, and was wondering which beer it was. :roll:

It's really more of a mustelid ale..
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: jwhouk on 09 Feb 2018, 18:26
It turns out that Emily is a fan of UW-Stoat's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Wisconsin%E2%80%93Stout) athletic teams.  :clairedoge:

They're actually known as the Blue Devils, but you already knew that, I think.  :parrot:

Stout, on a completely different subject, is one of only two UW System schools that are not named for the city or county where they are located. Stout (which would be known as UW-Menomonie if it followed convention) is named for its founder, James H. Stout.

The only other UW school not named for its city is technically named for its location: UW-Parkside. The school, constructed next to Petrifying Springs Park in northern Kenosha County, is situated halfway between Racine and Kenosha.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: OldGoat on 10 Feb 2018, 06:46
Stoat coat (from Old Goat).

(https://i.pinimg.com/236x/a8/03/ff/a803ff3a4d6c9c3a4887e654dc03ef7e.jpg)
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Gyrre on 10 Feb 2018, 15:18
OH MY GOD THEY ARE ADORABLE!!!!

*Ahem*

I mean, nice muscovid. Kudos.

I, too, would like to report that I made various polite and dignified sounds of approval while viewing the stoats.

And absolutely no glass objects cracked or shattered.
Title: Re: WCDT strips 3671 to 3675 (5th to 9th February 2018)
Post by: Gyrre on 10 Feb 2018, 15:47
I am glad I am not alone in squeaking about stoats. As a former ferret owner, any and all mustelidae fill me with glee.

Stoat? Dralm da**it, I read that as Stout, and was wondering which beer it was. :roll:

It's really more of a mustelid ale..


Just so long as it's not a pilsner. :P


Speaking semi-seriously, though; Emily strikes my as the sort to enjy alcohol more for the flavors and sociality than the getting drunk. So a good mixed drink like a 'seaside sunrise' or a 'screwdriver'.

[Fixing typos]

situated halfway between Racine and Kenosha.

I've got a grandfather from Kenosha.
I don't really recall why he moved from Wisconsin to Kansas. It might have been on assignment from the Salvation Army? Oddly enough, he moved here before meeting my grandmother. She happened to move here from Michigan. And both of them were 2nd generation immigrants (Germany for one, Scotland and Canada for the other).

Dr. Manhattan was right about it being a wonder what all has to happen for one person to be born.

[ please pardon the weird tangent. I'm still just waking up. ]