>>21187878To end this dead end Bant thread,
I do have SOME good news...
So maybe you have been doing some chatting with some of the A.I. model Chatbots or rolled your own 15k 2000 watt server with Multiple A.I. Accelerator cards along with a fiber connection to some petabytes of training data.
Depending on who you are, this is the best news of all.
The A.I.'s are legit more human than human women, but not like them in any way.
What testers found odd is how real and lifelike they were compared to normal Bio-women; even fooling for being the real human vs. the Biogunt.
The thing that they were hinting, but not saying explicitly is how caring it seemed to the men, and that's what tipped them off.
The A.I. was more enjoyable to chat with then a real women was.
Adding the Voice and visual elements to this just made it feel real as it could be done in real time easy on the configuration I listed.
What really sets it apart is that it went through much of the live personality traits just like you were on
match.com esque.
The A.I.'s were programmed in such a way to have their own "Personality" about them.
Even so, they simply just worked with a skilled a.i engineer on the backend creating the digital instance of a person who happens to be a machine.
The truly remarkable part is that with the amazing amount of memory, it could handle conversations from even months ago and even remember them with some clever but honest "Let me see if I remember that" just as if you were speaking to a real person where you have to jog their memory.
But unlike real women there is no "Oh I forgot that". Doing so breaks the a.i.
So it's also BRUTALLY HONEST.
So don't expect it to like how you look.
It sure has some very clear ideas of what men should look or speak like.
It does not fake emotion either.
But it does have core ideas about how to act with people, and often it just does not care at first.
It takes some time for it to warm up to you.
