Might wanna put an NSFW tag on this...
We won a CES robotics innovation award, then they took it back
51–60 of 92 posts
Re: We won a CES robotics innovation award, then they took it back
#52As impressive as this toy sounds, I don't see how it is related to robotics. The comparison between a vibrator and a full sex robot does not make sense to me; a sex bot needs to articulate joints and show human expressions, a vibrator needs to make some ver slight movements in very specific places. I don't blame the author for being upset about this because I can't see a reason to retract the submission to the contes…
but it does get them clicks and is a way to milk the situation. marketing is getting paid for this one. mo one cares about appeals to reason. everyone clicks on appeals to emotion
Re: We won a CES robotics innovation award, then they took it back
#53[deleted]
Re: We won a CES robotics innovation award, then they took it back
#54As impressive as this toy sounds, I don't see how it is related to robotics. The comparison between a vibrator and a full sex robot does not make sense to me; a sex bot needs to articulate joints and show human expressions, a vibrator needs to make some ver slight movements in very specific places. I don't blame the author for being upset about this because I can't see a reason to retract the submission to the contes…
It comes down to semantics, but based off the opening paragraph on "Robot" it seems that it would fit the definition:
"A robot is a machine—especially one programmable by a computer— capable of carrying out a complex series of actions automatically. Robots can be guided by an external control device or the control may be embedded within. Robots may be constructed to take on human form but most robots are machines designed to perform a task with no regard to how they look"
From the description in the article it sounded like the entry managed complex simulations of a tongue and fingers. I can see how it could be defined as a robot.
I haven't looked up what the CES definition/guidelines for a robotics entry is though.
Re: We won a CES robotics innovation award, then they took it back
#55As impressive as this toy sounds, I don't see how it is related to robotics. The comparison between a vibrator and a full sex robot does not make sense to me; a sex bot needs to articulate joints and show human expressions, a vibrator needs to make some ver slight movements in very specific places. I don't blame the author for being upset about this because I can't see a reason to retract the submission to the contes…
It does match the definition of a robot as based on this dictionary's second definition: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/robot
There was also likely a long process for awards, its a pretty scumbag move to suddenly just not give the award/honor after announcing it, I can imagine my anger too if someone was going to give me an award and then not. CES is in the wrong here, they've been quite unprofessional.
The lady does sound a bit too dramatic but I imagine she is pissed, that's all.
Re: We won a CES robotics innovation award, then they took it back
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
What part of that chain of events would lead to a sexist outcome? Where's the gender bias introduced?
I think CES's half-formed "this is immoral" and "this is not a robot" excuses would have been less likely if the product was targeted at men.
Without an example of them showing bias by actually giving an award to a product that is much like theirs that targets men this is sheer conjecture, and presumption of bias. Has the CES ever given an award for an adult product? Perhaps it could be due to the USA having very puritan views on sex still to this day (Violence OK on broadcast TV, but no nudity/sex).
Re: We won a CES robotics innovation award, then they took it back
#57It's 2019, saying your sex toy is for women and LGTBITQZ+ is antiquated and simply reeks of bigotry. It's no wonder they took your award back. If you want to be a revolutionary, say your sex toy is for children.
Re: We won a CES robotics innovation award, then they took it back
#58For those who didn't read the article... The author is claiming that their is a partial lewdness order among products so that normal products <= robotic vibrator <= vr porn. Therefore, if the lewdness threshold doesn't ban vr porn it cannot ban robotic vibrators either. But since robotic vibrators are banned and not vr porn, discrimination must be at play.
I didn't read it as "vibrators are banned in general", but as "vibrators are banned from receiving awards (in the robotics category)". As far as I can tell, the VR porn and the "sex robot for men" were not given awards either. They were just present on the CES.
I believe they're not allowed to exhibit either (unless there exhibiting rights where prehaps dependent on winning an award)
we were unexpectedly informed that the administrators at CES and CTA were rescinding our award and subsequently that we would not be allowed to showcase Osé, or even exhibit at CES 2019
Re: We won a CES robotics innovation award, then they took it back
#59For those who didn't read the article... The author is claiming that their is a partial lewdness order among products so that normal products <= robotic vibrator <= vr porn. Therefore, if the lewdness threshold doesn't ban vr porn it cannot ban robotic vibrators either. But since robotic vibrators are banned and not vr porn, discrimination must be at play.
No, I did not misuse the word "ban". Read the article:
"My team rejoiced and celebrated. A month later our excitement and preparations were cut short when we were unexpectedly informed that the administrators at CES and CTA were rescinding our award and subsequently that we would not be allowed to showcase Osé, or even exhibit at CES 2019."
I.e the product was BANNED. Really seems that in this HN thread people are bending themselves backwards trying to find any other explanation for the events EXCEPT for sexism and/or discrimination. It is as if people have a priori decided that sexism can't occur.
Re: We won a CES robotics innovation award, then they took it back
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess the argument is that if the only difference between two "robots" is the gender of their intended audience, and one gets banned, then that's prejudice. Along the same lines as, if the only difference between two people doing the same job is their gender, and one gets paid more, then that's prejudice. They're not wrong. Of course, CES could argue that it's bad timing - that the new product came out just as CES…
Their vibrator got banned from competing for an award. It did NOT get banned from being at CES. The male-focused sex products did not even compete for the awards as far as I can tell, or at least did not get any of the awards.
>and subsequently that we would not be allowed to showcase Osé, or even exhibit at CES 2019.
It did, which means that there is a bias, given that other sex-themed tech was not similarly banned.