Before the start of the pandemic, I adopted a greyhound. I had never ever had a dog at home. Byron was a gorgeous creature, full of terrors and traumas caused by the hunter who was his first owner. It supposed a challenge to take care of him in a city, plenty of hard, disturbing noises, that could provoke some crazy runs, facing roads, cars, and a tramway. Some nights of fireworks, I found him trembling inside the bath. Due to poor food attention when he was a puppy, he tended to eat as much as he could in one intake, and was always in search of outdoor debris, droppings, and corpses.
He died one year ago from sudden viral pneumonia. And a part of me also passed away. He was the dog who never barked, always waiting for me, for any stroke, loyal and loving, tender and warm. He didn't bark, he couldn't talk, but I have never been so connected with another living being. There weren't those ultimate barriers, the shields we put between humans, even between the most affectionate lovers. I miss him every day, sometimes with funny, happy memories, sometimes crying, like right now.
I am a complete atheist, and I don't believe in such fantasies people make of afterlives. But if I am wrong, and there is a Heaven up there, I hope Byron will be there, running wild and free, unbound by limits and evil.
If robot dogs aren't close to being as cuddly as real dogs right now, it's because of technological limitations
And if the "nature" experience was indistinguishable from reality, i'm pretty sure it would bring similar benefits
But when it comes to pets, I feel like some of the attachment that people have towards them comes from the very inconveniences that they cause, and from the responsibility that they bring, it seems to help form a bond (or even an obsessive codependency)
I agree. The fact that they DO die (even though it's sad and people desperately don't want it to happen) is, at a deep and probably often unacknowledged and maybe not conscious level, a feature, not a bug. And I think so are other "necessary imperfections" in a bundle of sorts.
Just like in the Oatmeal comic that we all probably know but still worth revisiting (and I have no dogs, but the cat version while less exuberantly bathetic would hold to the same principle, we develop a bond with a creature that unless you're very very old yourself you're almost guaranteed to outlive):
I think both possibilities are true: it’s extremely difficult to create a good enough simulation of a pet and we also don’t really want them. I’ve been very fortunate to get a puppy border collie 3 years ago, who grew up to be the most loving, the funniest, greatest dog ever. I’ve had other dogs and cats, and I have chickens, and was attached to them all and cried when they died, even when a hen died, but he is very special, and the first pet that made me wish I could do what Barbra Streisand has been doing, and clone him. A robot pet, no matter how advanced, no matter how easy to keep, would never, ever replace him.
I have two dogs so I'm biased but part of the charm of a pet is that you learn to work with them flaws and all. One of my dogs likes to just sit when we're out on a walk. Something will grab her attention and she'll just want to chill there. That's not a "feature" you'd want in a robot dog. Programing a dog to seemingly at random just interrupt whatever activity you're doing isn't going to be popular.
But she's got my heart despite that as I've learned to use some of those moments to just enjoy being together. And sometimes I just end up pulling her up by the harness so we can get a move on. We've got a bit of give and take and that's very fulfilling.
In God, Human, Animal, Machine, Meghan O'Gieblyn gives an interesting account of her experiences and reflections living with a robot dog. The book is a great read on our evolving relationships with technology!
Interesting piece, but at some point, deep fakes will jump to meat space, making it hard to distinguish between living and non-living - indeed, perhaps modifying our definition of life itself.
I'm going to mention Phillip K Dick's 'Andrioids/Sheep' again... In the book... well, it's right there in the title, isn't it? Everyone had these pets that were really status symbols. Only rich people with successful substacks could afford real animals. Everyone else had convincing fakes....
hmmm... the appeal would be exotic animals: Flying foxes, tawny frogmouths, and cassowaries... Thylacoleo carnifex.
No... It's kids. The appeal is kids. Kids that don't keep you up at night. Kids that don't have tantrums in the supermarket. Kids that give you access to parental parking spaces and that you can teach to be like you... Kids that you can ignore... kids that will never find you uncool, or boring, or cause you pain or angst... or leave... or grow up.
"It's annoying how distractable you are, Kestrel. Can you dial that back a couple of points? Just enough to make it easier to teach you to read."
Interesting topic. I think as long as the robot pet has enough endearing characteristics (crucially, as long as it makes you feel needed and appreciated), people will fall for it. Even if it has a metallic body. I think the more features resembling love and appreciation, the better for sure. But, the robot pet just has to seem to have a pleasant ‘mind of its own’, and we will play pretend like children.
Interesting piece and I look forward to hearing your thoughts on artificial people. Thinking about the internet's development history, it seems to me that the first real use of human companion robots will likely be sexbots.
One more thing--how can you write this piece about artificial pets without a reference to Philip K. Dick's "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep"? I know, it's the basis for the Blade Runner movies, but the book focused much more on the artificial pets and the shame their owners felt over not having real, living pets.
I think people want to love and be loved back in return.
Before the start of the pandemic, I adopted a greyhound. I had never ever had a dog at home. Byron was a gorgeous creature, full of terrors and traumas caused by the hunter who was his first owner. It supposed a challenge to take care of him in a city, plenty of hard, disturbing noises, that could provoke some crazy runs, facing roads, cars, and a tramway. Some nights of fireworks, I found him trembling inside the bath. Due to poor food attention when he was a puppy, he tended to eat as much as he could in one intake, and was always in search of outdoor debris, droppings, and corpses.
He died one year ago from sudden viral pneumonia. And a part of me also passed away. He was the dog who never barked, always waiting for me, for any stroke, loyal and loving, tender and warm. He didn't bark, he couldn't talk, but I have never been so connected with another living being. There weren't those ultimate barriers, the shields we put between humans, even between the most affectionate lovers. I miss him every day, sometimes with funny, happy memories, sometimes crying, like right now.
I am a complete atheist, and I don't believe in such fantasies people make of afterlives. But if I am wrong, and there is a Heaven up there, I hope Byron will be there, running wild and free, unbound by limits and evil.
Beautiful comment, thank you for sharing.
I feel like the TV analogy doesn't quite hold
If robot dogs aren't close to being as cuddly as real dogs right now, it's because of technological limitations
And if the "nature" experience was indistinguishable from reality, i'm pretty sure it would bring similar benefits
But when it comes to pets, I feel like some of the attachment that people have towards them comes from the very inconveniences that they cause, and from the responsibility that they bring, it seems to help form a bond (or even an obsessive codependency)
I agree. The fact that they DO die (even though it's sad and people desperately don't want it to happen) is, at a deep and probably often unacknowledged and maybe not conscious level, a feature, not a bug. And I think so are other "necessary imperfections" in a bundle of sorts.
Just like in the Oatmeal comic that we all probably know but still worth revisiting (and I have no dogs, but the cat version while less exuberantly bathetic would hold to the same principle, we develop a bond with a creature that unless you're very very old yourself you're almost guaranteed to outlive):
https://theoatmeal.com/comics/dog_paradox
...scroll to the end past all ball licking ;)
I think both possibilities are true: it’s extremely difficult to create a good enough simulation of a pet and we also don’t really want them. I’ve been very fortunate to get a puppy border collie 3 years ago, who grew up to be the most loving, the funniest, greatest dog ever. I’ve had other dogs and cats, and I have chickens, and was attached to them all and cried when they died, even when a hen died, but he is very special, and the first pet that made me wish I could do what Barbra Streisand has been doing, and clone him. A robot pet, no matter how advanced, no matter how easy to keep, would never, ever replace him.
I have two dogs so I'm biased but part of the charm of a pet is that you learn to work with them flaws and all. One of my dogs likes to just sit when we're out on a walk. Something will grab her attention and she'll just want to chill there. That's not a "feature" you'd want in a robot dog. Programing a dog to seemingly at random just interrupt whatever activity you're doing isn't going to be popular.
But she's got my heart despite that as I've learned to use some of those moments to just enjoy being together. And sometimes I just end up pulling her up by the harness so we can get a move on. We've got a bit of give and take and that's very fulfilling.
In God, Human, Animal, Machine, Meghan O'Gieblyn gives an interesting account of her experiences and reflections living with a robot dog. The book is a great read on our evolving relationships with technology!
The dog is artificial, and so is the love it feels.
Out walking my dog in New York, he encountered his first robot dog on the sidewalk.... it did not go well:
https://www.instagram.com/newyorkcartoons/reel/C7FnL6JACxU/
Interesting piece, but at some point, deep fakes will jump to meat space, making it hard to distinguish between living and non-living - indeed, perhaps modifying our definition of life itself.
I'm going to mention Phillip K Dick's 'Andrioids/Sheep' again... In the book... well, it's right there in the title, isn't it? Everyone had these pets that were really status symbols. Only rich people with successful substacks could afford real animals. Everyone else had convincing fakes....
hmmm... the appeal would be exotic animals: Flying foxes, tawny frogmouths, and cassowaries... Thylacoleo carnifex.
No... It's kids. The appeal is kids. Kids that don't keep you up at night. Kids that don't have tantrums in the supermarket. Kids that give you access to parental parking spaces and that you can teach to be like you... Kids that you can ignore... kids that will never find you uncool, or boring, or cause you pain or angst... or leave... or grow up.
"It's annoying how distractable you are, Kestrel. Can you dial that back a couple of points? Just enough to make it easier to teach you to read."
PS. Someone I knew bought an AIBO soon after the launch. It was the worst value for money purchase I can think of - fun for about 5 minutes.
Interesting topic. I think as long as the robot pet has enough endearing characteristics (crucially, as long as it makes you feel needed and appreciated), people will fall for it. Even if it has a metallic body. I think the more features resembling love and appreciation, the better for sure. But, the robot pet just has to seem to have a pleasant ‘mind of its own’, and we will play pretend like children.
Interesting piece and I look forward to hearing your thoughts on artificial people. Thinking about the internet's development history, it seems to me that the first real use of human companion robots will likely be sexbots.
One more thing--how can you write this piece about artificial pets without a reference to Philip K. Dick's "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep"? I know, it's the basis for the Blade Runner movies, but the book focused much more on the artificial pets and the shame their owners felt over not having real, living pets.