- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
This post has prompted me to give a reminder that one of the authors of AI 2027 predicted back in 2021 that “prompt programming” would be a thing by now.
It was already a thing in 2021 so not much of a prediction.
It was a thing in the sense that the promptfondlers were trying to portray prompting as a matter of fine technique and skill (as opposed to dumb luck mixed with trial and error with a few general guidelines that half work). It was not a thing then and is still not now in the sense that prompting has none of the skill or precision or verifiability or reliability of actual programming.
Why does that humanoid robot have apparently metal breasts and a conventionally “pretty” face? Am I supposed to want to fuck it?
The art is the way that it is because the artist made it that way. The image is not particularly sexual, and robot art can be woman-coded. If you want to project some misogynist angle onto some stock art that has no bearing on the article, that’s fine, I guess.
Nougat wants to fuck the robot and blames the robot for this
Stupid sexy robots!
E: Oh also that’s just straight up rape culture.
Oh, where to start.
Sexy woman coded, perhaps, unless you’re saying that women who don’t have prominent breasts and what appears to be makeup aren’t real women
But this is a drawing of a machine. Machines don’t have gender, biological or social or otherwise. Whoever created this image thought, consciously or not, “I’m going to make a picture of a robot, and I’m gonna make it a sexy woman robot.” Not just a “woman-coded” humanoid robot - because that can be done without playing heavy on the sexiness, right?
So why? Why make a sexy woman robot? I ask again: Am I supposed to want to fuck it?
Sexy woman coded, perhaps, unless you’re saying that women who don’t have prominent breasts and what appears to be makeup aren’t real women
Why are you conflating “real”ness with sexiness?
But this is a drawing of a machine. Machines don’t have gender, biological or social or otherwise.
This is actually incorrect. Gender is a social construct. Anything can have gender if (a) society agrees upon it.
Whoever created this image thought, consciously or not, “I’m going to make a picture of a robot, and I’m gonna make it a sexy woman robot.” Not just a “woman-coded” humanoid robot […]
You have not proved this. Also, which is it? Machines don’t have gender, or this machine is a sexy woman robot? Your analysis and discourse are inconsistent and lacking.
because that can be done without playing heavy on the sexiness, right?
Again, the image is not particularly sexy. Just having large breast-analogs in the picture doesn’t make it sexy, unless you’re a stereotypical teenage boy.
So why? Why make a sexy woman robot? I ask again: Am I supposed to want to fuck it?
You have not earned the right to ask these questions.
we sincerely hope not
Are you saying that women who don’t have prominent breasts or wear makeup aren’t sexy?
