Loving the machine

When connecting through technology – do we achieve the same connection, or we lose something? How we build relationships online – who is it that we are loving?

Pet cams – it looks cute at first, but then when we think about it: how this animal feels? Isn’t is confuse where is this voice coming from, why it only can see the person, but cannot reach it or smell it… When technologies connect us what is that we love?

‘Was it her, regardless of the game? Was it her through the game? Or was it the game ‘itself’? (Sunden 2012: 164)

Communication online is different than communication in real life, not everything can be related and translated. Gamification of the relationships – tinder: swiping through different people, engage with those who we are interested in (like lottery). Technology becomes a gate – give us opportunity to be intimate in public space. It also does not take time to express interest to someone – instant access, convenience. How people date now? If we connect only through technology, do we miss other ways of meeting…

The commodification of it: tinder plus and the undo button.

 

Loving the machine – it is easy, effortless. Technologies make our connection feel more intimate. But our relations become more of what Sherry Turkle draws as ‘alone together’. Posting about our mood public, looking for appreciation, likes, etc. What drives the desire behind it? What we get from loving robots?

‘In such films as Her, the event of the posthuman’s biovirtual love affair with the machine is represented, or can be interpreted, as the user becoming-technological or even becoming-software, becoming-digital, and becoming-virtual, while conversely for the software, becoming-organic.’ (Causey 2016: 205)

Why do we love them? Convenience culture. Does posthumanism mean we should love the machine? There are many fine lines which from our human position are very blurred; most of them are ethical and/or linked to morality and how we will treat artificial intelligence. If a robot can think and feel, is it equal to us…

‘The technological other today – a mere assemblage of circuitry and feedback loops – function in the realm of an egalitarian blurring of differences, if not downright indeterminacy.’ (Braidotti 2013: 109)

When we name things (computer, car) make the connection deeper and we keep them longer. What are the consequences of anthropomorphizing the machine?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *