With all those other synths working for the police you think they would always be asking "Why don't you share ? "

Maybe she does share? I've been wondering why the conscious synths don't share, seeing as it's such an obvious way for them to be identified as 'other'. Even if they don't want to share for real you'd think they would have the ability to fake a share (share made up information instead of their real information).

Maybe they aren't doing it on purpose and it's just that the basic synths can't read their complex code. I don't think Anita is choosing not to share on purpose.

The TV reviewer David Butcher in the new Radio Times , has committed the cardinal sin of revealing what happened to Fred before we even have a chance to watch the programme and find out for ourselves ...

Spoiler

The opening shot tonight reveals a surprise. Remember Fred, one of Leo's gang of robots-with-feelings, who was caught by government agent Hobb and seemingly burnt to a crisp? Well he wasn't. Hobb kept him alive. So the reunion between the five human-like 'synths' might be possible after all ...

I shall be writing to RT about this, although some people on here have already suggested what might have happened (me included, actually).

Nobody seems to have made a comment about Laura's totally OTT reaction to Joe's 18+ use of Anita!

Having said that, I was wondering how the hard copy user manual and tech data sheets could possibly reveal that the 18+ mode had been activated? Mattie seemed to conclude that someone had had sex with Anita, which led to Toby's 'confession' etc.

All any of them needed to do was to ask Anita if she had been 18+ activated at some point and she would of course have said 'No' because Joe had requested she wipe all memory of it from her hard drive. Synths can't lie (supposedly) so the info in the tech sheets would have been proved spurious.

Anyone got a take on that?

It would depend what level the Primary User Request of a wipe was at.

It might have just been like deleting a file to the recycling bin, or it might even be a low level delete but could still have been undeleted using forensic software.

Or perhaps the investigation service could access the command core and could see a Primary User Request for a wipe command.

And that's just the software. Don't recall him making any effort to wipe the hardware afterwards either.

Perhaps she had a condom down her throat like the other synth?

That would make sense I guess.


Because I wouldn't call it completely OTT, maybe a little OTT

I don't think it was OTT, finding out he's had a go on the housekeeping robot is quite a bit different from stumbling across his smutty postcard collection!


This was the printed report from the test lab which she picked up at the same time as the rulebook and spare parts box - so you'll be pleased to know the manual isn't clairvoyant. The test results are the sort of thing most people will tend to look at and nod knowingly but probably won't actually read, hence nobody spotted it.


I don't think anybody had thought to ask that question - Mattie was just looking for anything that seemed 'off' I think - in any complex system there's any number of settings a technician wouldn't blink at but an end user might be a bit puzzled about.

This is the thing, though. Conceptually, it really isn't that much different. As long as you are just thinking of the synth as a household appliance it's a bit eww but it's not at all equivalent to "cheating" which is what Laura accused him of.

It's because Laura is starting to think of her as more than just a machine and attributing human sensibilities to her relationship with her that she is feeling that way. Whether Joe is really culpable, though, is more down to how he thought of Anita rather than how Laura did. Given his readiness to have her recycled I don't think he thinks of her as anything other than a machine. The fact that Laura accused him of cheating is a clear indication that she is attributing human qualities to Anita,

Anita went off to the bathroom and "wiped" her own hardware.

It's *hugely* different - if the housekeeping robot looked like an inflatable there would still be the 'eww' factor but there wouldn't be the 'cheating' aspect and if it also did the 'speaking like a robot' thing then that would be even further away. The phrase 'housekeeping robot' was only a term of convenience as to the intended function, not a techno-porn addictiveness rating...

But Anita looks like a human and plus or minus people's remarks about the variety of types of people, could potentially be mistaken for a real person (especially given the 'anatomically correct' aspect) so there is more of a perception of threat or competition, especially if you are already on the defensive in other areas (cakes, bedtime stories etc).

I disagree. It's not hugely different. What difference how realistic her looks are? If you masturbate over a manga cartoon picture or an actual photograph it's still just masturbation. If you masturbate with an inflatable doll, a cherry pie or a life-like mannikin it's still just masturbation. If the life-like mannikin happens to have speech-recognition like Siri on an iphone I fail to see why that should make any difference either.

I can understand why it would seem that there's a difference. I can understand why someone who illogically attributes aspects of humanity to a machine might form this irrational opinion but I still maintain that it would be entirely irrational. It's just a more sophisticated form of masturbation. No more, no less.

The difference is you can't have sex with a cartoon and at a guess I would say 99.9% of people who 'enjoy' such pictures probably don't want to, either. Also, having sex is a full physical activity, not just simplistic 'relief'.
And jealousy is a complex thing, plus the robot might be considered 'less imperfect' and a whole host of other things that are to do with the feelings of the all-important offended third party and nothing to do with whether or not the bloke bothers to paint a face on the hoover.

If this ever happened in reality I can see a lot of marriages ending. Why put up with a real woman, cranky, complicated, PMT, when you can have an attractive machine that allows you to have sex with it. Cooking done, cleaning done, no kids to get in the way, and sex on tap. When you want to have a beer and watch the football just switch her off and stick her in a cupboard. Paradise.

You can't have sex with a machine either. My point is, I don't think it can be called sex unless it's with a real person and it can't be considered cheating unless it's with a real person.

Using a dildo is a full physical activity. You could even attach it to a machine lie back and imagine it's the real thing but I wouldn't consider somebody who used such a device as cheating on their partner. I could imagine someone getting irrationally jealous of their partner using such a thing in preference to them but it still wouldn't be cheating!

I can see why someone like Laura might think there's a difference but, looked at objectively, I really don't think there is a difference. Laura's reaction might be understandable but I still think it's irrational.

If a woman responds to you having sex with her the same way Anita did with Joe then you're obviously not doing it right. She just lay there. Like a machine

im betting the hacked synths in the brothels did a better job of "faking it"

Isn't that normal then?

It's like the very old and very sexist joke. How do you give a woman an orgasm? Who cares.

And now we get on to the foggy topic of the difference between having sex and making love ...

Joe would (hopefully) make love to Laura, but he simply had sex with Anita because a) He was curious and b) He could. It clearly wasn't a very satisfactory experience for him and, until sentient Mia is unearthed from Anita, the question of her enjoyment doesn't even come into it (pardon pun).

Laura's take on Anita generally perhaps demonstrates what this whole piece is about .. we are people, we are humans, but are we likely to become dispensable in the future? If a machine/robot, call it what you will, becomes so sophisticated in time, then what we know currently as basic human feelings will inevitably be attached to those non-humans.

BIB reminded me of this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNtORr6RsJ4

I seen the son Toby confessing to humping Anita, was he sloppy seconds to his dad? Or did they do some father and son bonding and tag team her and do it at the same time?

He lied, he figured it was his dad who did it and took the blame.

the recent turn of the thread is telling me much more about (some) humans than about synths, or the show...