Relationship Woes and Advice 23: Answer Unclear, Try Again

[Serpentine]

"Hey [name], would you like to come on a date with me to [activity] with me on [day, time]?"

If she declines: "Oh well, it was worth a shot. Wanna do it as just friends, instead?/See you round!"

[AttilaTheGeek]

So, I seem to have run into a bit of an issue.

It all starts out the way you've probably heard a million times before. "So, there's this girl..." (If I'm going to be cliché, I'll at least be ironic about it). I've known her through an extracurricular (engineering, but we're both only on it for the application cred) for several years now, but before about a month ago I had never had a real conversation with her. After telling a joke offhand with "Asimov's three laws of robotics" as the punch line, I found out she was a huge sci-fi fan. But she had never read I, Robot!

So later on, I get a facebook message from her asking if I have it on DVD. I don't. But I was rather busy at the moment, and I knew the odds of her actually seeing it at my house were low, so I told her the DVD cabinet was buried behind redoing the entire front room of the house, and that it would take me a while to check. It's partially true. She said "Don't worry about it, thanks though". One of my friends suggested saying I had it, and then running out and buying it if she invited me to watch it. However, having learned from Toby Ziegler not to tempt fate, I called every Best Buy and DVD store in my area, and I can't find it. It's not on netflix either. It's been a couple days since then, and I've been paralyzed. What do I do?

[Serpentine]

Seems kinda weird that you can't find it anywhere. Minor point: the movie wasn't originally written as an adaption of Asimov's stories. It shares some points with it, but any sci-fi purist is probably going to rage at it. But if she sees the movie before reading the book, she should be fine. You maybe not so much...

Anyway, why not tell her that you don't have it but you're ordering it online (I'll be truly shocked if you can't get it on Amazon or somewhere), and ask if she wants to come watch it when it arrives?

[inexorabletruth]

Amazon!: http://www.amazon.com/Robot-Widescre.../dp/B00005JN0T

Netflix: http://movies.netflix.com/WiMovie/I_...8?locale=en-US

And don't rule out the library. Sometimes they have pretty awesome DVDs.

[AttilaTheGeek]

Seems kinda weird that you can't find it anywhere. Minor point: the movie wasn't originally written as an adaption of Asimov's stories. It shares some points with it, but any sci-fi purist is probably going to rage at it. But if she sees the movie before reading the book, she should be fine. You maybe not so much...

Anyway, why not tell her that you don't have it but you're ordering it online (I'll be truly shocked if you can't get it on Amazon or somewhere), and ask if she wants to come watch it when it arrives?

Nah, we're no sci-fi purists here. I did tell her I ordered it, though (I didn't, because I've already seen it, but worst comes to worst, I pay for overnight shipping if I need to) and I asked her if she wanted to see it. I'm now waiting for a response.

[Lazy Genius]

Ok, so I'm havign a bit of trouble, lots of things going on in my life I have no control over (too many things, can't even begin to fathom), and I'm getting sick of it. I want to eb able to find the things I do have control over and make that worth my while. With that in mind; can anyone interested enough/enough time to hear my rambling (aka: read my walls of text) send me a PM? It's about combined issues, mostly somewhat like "Love and Other Drugs" except it's nothing like the movie, the name just fits.

[noparlpf]

So, I seem to have run into a bit of an issue.

It all starts out the way you've probably heard a million times before. "So, there's this girl..." (If I'm going to be cliché, I'll at least be ironic about it). I've known her through an extracurricular (engineering, but we're both only on it for the application cred) for several years now, but before about a month ago I had never had a real conversation with her. After telling a joke offhand with "Asimov's three laws of robotics" as the punch line, I found out she was a huge sci-fi fan. But she had never read I, Robot!

So later on, I get a facebook message from her asking if I have it on DVD. I don't. But I was rather busy at the moment, and I knew the odds of her actually seeing it at my house were low, so I told her the DVD cabinet was buried behind redoing the entire front room of the house, and that it would take me a while to check. It's partially true. She said "Don't worry about it, thanks though". One of my friends suggested saying I had it, and then running out and buying it if she invited me to watch it. However, having learned from Toby Ziegler not to tempt fate, I called every Best Buy and DVD store in my area, and I can't find it. It's not on netflix either. It's been a couple days since then, and I've been paralyzed. What do I do?

Step One: Warn her that it is nothing like the book and that the only reason she might be able to watch it is because she hasn't read the book yet.
Step Two: Order the DVD from Amazon, and don't lie about something next time even if it is something small.

[Glass Mouse]

The conversation from a few pages ago got me wondering.

Has anyone here ever had any luck with pushing or asking "why" after getting a clear no? Like, any version of:
#2: Wanna date?
#1: No.
#2: Why not? I think we'd be great together!
#1: Y'know what, you're right. How about Sunday?
#2: Yay!

I know that with me, pushing effectively turns any lingering "maybe" into a solid "NO!". But does it work with anyone? Is there any point to doing it? Or is it purely the defense of a bruised ego?

[Thufir]

The conversation from a few pages ago got me wondering.

Has anyone here ever had any luck with pushing or asking "why" after getting a clear no? Like, any version of:
#2: Wanna date?
#1: No.
#2: Why not? I think we'd be great together!
#1: Y'know what, you're right. How about Sunday?
#2: Yay!

I know that with me, pushing effectively turns any lingering "maybe" into a solid "NO!". But does it work with anyone? Is there any point to doing it? Or is it purely the defense of a bruised ego?

I wouldn't imagine so, certainly not phrased that way. Maybe some thing like saying "Well, you know, I thought I'd ask, because so-and-so thought we'd be great together/I thought we were flirting that time/whatever" could possibly maybe prompt someone to consider those points on a lingering maybe (So many maybes in this sentence), but putting it as a straight "Why not" seems to pushy and likely to be off-putting. Like I said in that previous discussion, the only sensible reason for it I can think of is to know if you were misreading signals or if there werejust other circumstances conspiring against you.

[Form]

Just my damn luck... Can I get one person to send a PM moan to?

Edit: Then again, nevermind. I'm doing better now.

[Thajocoth]

They have the same moral at least...

Don't program the three laws of robotics into sentient machines. They're far too open to interpretation and there is far too much that can go wrong. Without them, you may get the occasional rogue bot, but for the most part robots will fit into society.

[Marillion]

I'm not saying don't go for it, in fact I'd say you should at least try a date or two to see if it'll work out. Just don't jump in without knowing what could happen.

Very solid advice. Probably should have followed it, rather than making out with her for 2 hours in her car after work. But OH WELL NO TAKEBACKS.

[Coidzor]

The conversation from a few pages ago got me wondering.

Has anyone here ever had any luck with pushing or asking "why" after getting a clear no? Like, any version of:
#2: Wanna date?
#1: No.
#2: Why not? I think we'd be great together!
#1: Y'know what, you're right. How about Sunday?
#2: Yay!

I know that with me, pushing effectively turns any lingering "maybe" into a solid "NO!". But does it work with anyone? Is there any point to doing it? Or is it purely the defense of a bruised ego?

Less defense and more automatic reaction that some people have which they have to use training and behavior-modification to get rid of, I'd say, based upon my observational and confirmation bias.

[snoopy13a]

The conversation from a few pages ago got me wondering.

Has anyone here ever had any luck with pushing or asking "why" after getting a clear no? Like, any version of:
#2: Wanna date?
#1: No.
#2: Why not? I think we'd be great together!
#1: Y'know what, you're right. How about Sunday?
#2: Yay!

I know that with me, pushing effectively turns any lingering "maybe" into a solid "NO!". But does it work with anyone? Is there any point to doing it? Or is it purely the defense of a bruised ego?

Playing a little devil's advocate, suppose that:

1) Persistence works only 5% of the time
2) The persistent asker doesn't care about maintaining a platonic relationship with the person asked--that is, he doesn't care if she thinks he is a slimeball.

Under those conditions, persistence would be an effective strategy even though: 1) It hardly ever works and 2) Most of time, the askee develops a negative opinion of the asker.

Thus, as long as it works on some people, there will probably be people who are persistent about asking others out.

[Serpentine]

They have the same moral at least...

Don't program the three laws of robotics into sentient machines. They're far too open to interpretation and there is far too much that can go wrong. Without them, you may get the occasional rogue bot, but for the most part robots will fit into society.

The stories in the book don't have that moral at all

Spoiler

Show

The one rogue bot is due to messing with those three laws. The closest situation in the books to the movie - where the superdupercomputers were having unfortunate things happen to specific people who would harm them and thereby compromise their ability to take care of everyone else - involves the people who discover that fact burying it because people won't want to know about it, but it works.

The morals of the book, as far as I can find one, are "don't **** with the Three Laws; they work, bitches" and "robots are better people than people".

[Thajocoth]

Most stories in the book seemed to be how the three laws were irrelevant... How they could be interpreted so many ways as to not matter... Like the lawyer robot getting around not hitting a human by them setting up another robot impersonating a human, or the machine temporarily killing the astronauts (when sending them to another galaxy), justifying it because they're not dead afterward, or the robot missing one of the laws being deemed not dangerous after demonstrating two ways of interpreting that law in their test...

The ONLY story I can think of that had the 3 laws as a good thing was when they were trying to catch the fast robot on Mercury, and even then, why should the robot not be free to go where it wants to? Stop trying to catch it. Leave it alone. It's not hurting anyone.

A true thinking AI of sufficient intelligence is a person & should have all the same rights & responsibilities as anyone else. WE don't have the three laws hardcoded in, yet the vast majority of us don't go on murderous rampages... Machines will be no different.

[Serpentine]

Not at all relevant to this thread, so this'll be my last response:

Spoiler

Show

Most stories in the book seemed to be how the three laws were irrelevant... How they could be interpreted so many ways as to not matter... Like the lawyer robot getting around not hitting a human by them setting up another robot impersonating a human,

And the main character decided it was alright having a robot as a politician, because the Three Laws meant that it was basically incapable of not being a GOOD one. Not sure how you consider that to be "getting around the Law therefore they don't matter": It had to "prove" that it was "real", but couldn't hurt anyone to do it. It's a demonstration of the law, not "getting around it" - getting around it would involve actually hurting a human.

or the machine temporarily killing the astronauts (when sending them to another galaxy), justifying it because they're not dead afterward,

Can't remember that one, but I'm pretty sure the machine was demonstrably correct.

or the robot missing one of the laws being deemed not dangerous after demonstrating two ways of interpreting that law in their test...

The robot missing one of the laws was, iirc, deemed INCREDIBLY dangerous, tracked down and destroyed. What with it being a real threat to human life and all.

Aaaaaand how 'bout dem r'ships?

[Thajocoth]

The robot missing one of the laws was, iirc, deemed INCREDIBLY dangerous, tracked down and destroyed. What with it being a real threat to human life and all.[/spoiler]

This is very incorrect. They recalled the lot, couldn't figure out which one it was, and eventually un-recalled them all without finding it. Said it's self-preservation would cause it to act like it had the law built in, as to not stand out.

The rest would each be ethical debates, and I hate those. Clearly, we disagree. *shrug*

[Serpentine]

What?

Spoiler

Show

They did test the robots. It was one of the few scenes that the movie almost directly took from the book. They used its self preservation programming as a result of the removal of the Law to single it out. The reason the robot psychologist was there in the first place was because it had hurt someone.

edit: Yep, just double checked.

Spoiler

Show

Can't remember what happened to the rest of the robots, but Susan was absolutely horrified by the change, and the rogue bot ended up being destroyed after it attacked her.

I'm not even talking ethics, just plot.

[Thajocoth]

I, Robot had a lot of short stories, and I can't remember enough details to differentiate to bother to find it. I'll simply assume we're talking about two different stories in that book. I remember they had them crawl through wires to save someone, but the wires deactivated them. All bots passed. The next day, no bots passed & all explained that one bot had suggested that if they deactivate on their way to the guy, they wouldn't save him, and worse may be unable to save a future human. None of the bots could specify which bot suggested this.

[Serpentine]

I don't remember that story at all, and none of the ones listed in the Wiki resembles that as far as I can tell. The fact is, at least for me, the moral of the stories in the book I, Robot over and over again is "the Three Laws are crucially important, and make robots better people than people" - with various ethical questions raised like "what if computers take us over?"

[The Succubus]

So a very pretty girl messaged me on OK Cupid last week. I am simultaneously very happy and terrified of screwing up.

[Serpentine]

oooooOOOOOOOOooooooo

[The Succubus]

It seems we share a fondness for gaming, including a mutual interest in old classics like Shadow of the Colossus. Ummm....what's the etiquette for asking for someone's Steam ID or Xbox Live name on OKC? After a few messages? A first date? I know it's far, far too early to suggest split screen co-op. That's something to look forward to in the future.

[Rawhide]

The conversation from a few pages ago got me wondering.

Has anyone here ever had any luck with pushing or asking "why" after getting a clear no? Like, any version of:
#2: Wanna date?
#1: No.
#2: Why not? I think we'd be great together!
#1: Y'know what, you're right. How about Sunday?
#2: Yay!

I know that with me, pushing effectively turns any lingering "maybe" into a solid "NO!". But does it work with anyone? Is there any point to doing it? Or is it purely the defense of a bruised ego?

Actually, I have. I didn't specifically ask why, because the reason was already known. The reason was that we were friends and that she didn't want to risk the friendship. So, naturally I explained that I still wanted to give it a shot anyway and that I would do everything I could to maintain the friendship no matter what happened. This didn't happen just once.

---

Lost Little Robot is the story you're both thinking about. The robot didn't have a law removed, it had part of a law removed. Specifically "A robot may not harm a human or, through inaction, allow a human to come to harm". The robot was erased at the end.

[Serpentine]

I know part of the law was removed. Pretty sure the "crawling through wires" bit didn't happen, though, and it was disastrous.

Succubus: A gaming ID's not so bad. I'm leery of giving Skype or MSN until I've talked with them for a bit, but I'd probably hand over my Steam if someone asked. So just an "Oh, you like [Game]? I play that too. My ID's [X] if you want to add me." would be alright.

[Heliomance]

The stories in the book don't have that moral at all

Spoiler

Show

The one rogue bot is due to messing with those three laws. The closest situation in the books to the movie - where the superdupercomputers were having unfortunate things happen to specific people who would harm them and thereby compromise their ability to take care of everyone else - involves the people who discover that fact burying it because people won't want to know about it, but it works.

The morals of the book, as far as I can find one, are "don't **** with the Three Laws; they work, bitches" and "robots are better people than people".

Not quite; Asimov himself realised that the Three Laws were inadequate, and they were eventually modified to add the Zeroth Law: "A robot shall not harm humanity, or through inaction allow humanity to come to harm." The First Law was then changed to "A robot shall not injure a human being, or through inaction allow a human being to come to harm, except where this conflicts with the Zeroth Law."

The robot that worked this one out essentially died due to the strain of attempting to modify its programming like this, but did manage to pass on the modification to R. Daneel Olivaw, who then became the chessmaster pulling the strings behind the scenes of the entire Foundation series.

I, Robot had a lot of short stories, and I can't remember enough details to differentiate to bother to find it. I'll simply assume we're talking about two different stories in that book. I remember they had them crawl through wires to save someone, but the wires deactivated them. All bots passed. The next day, no bots passed & all explained that one bot had suggested that if they deactivate on their way to the guy, they wouldn't save him, and worse may be unable to save a future human. None of the bots could specify which bot suggested this.

I do remember that story - it's Little Lost Robot. They do eventually find it by remembering that they've taught it to tell the difference between infra-red radiation and gamma radiation. They run the "save someone" test again, telling all the robots that they've flooded the chamber with gamma radiation which will destroy the bots before they get to her. Only the lost robot moves, because it can detect that it's only harmless infra-red and doesn't realise that none of the other robots can detect this. On being discovered, it does indeed attempt to attack Susan, and is destroyed.

[Form]

Actually, I have. I didn't specifically ask why, because the reason was already known. The reason was that we were friends and that she didn't want to risk the friendship. So, naturally I explained that I still wanted to give it a shot anyway and that I would do everything I could to maintain the friendship no matter what happened. This didn't happen just once.

Maybe this is one of those things that depends on how it said/done, although I I have difficulty imagining how asking 'why not?' would change the outcome and I do understand one's not entitled to an answer. Did it change their answers for you when you tried?

[Rawhide]

Maybe this is one of those things that depends on how it said/done, although I I have difficulty imagining how asking 'why not?' would change the outcome and I do understand one's not entitled to an answer. Did it change their answers for you when you tried?

Well, I did specifically mention that I had success... So yes.

I wouldn't have continued if they didn't want to date me for other reasons, but risking the friendship when they would otherwise date me is one barrier I definitely think shouldn't exist and will try to overcome (in the right way).

[Dr.Epic]

So I have a question for you, and it's a toughie: how do you randomly start a conversation with a girl you've never spoken a single word to before but kind of like. I am currently in two school clubs with her.

Please tell me the answer involves ray guns. I'm good with ray guns. Unless she has a superhero boyfriend. Then things tend to end badly for me.

If it helps, I learned she's working she's working on a cosplay that involves armor, and I recently learned how to make armor and other metal things. Initially, I thought this could be a conversation starter, but then I learned she needs to be able to swim in it. Metal armor plus swimming without serious ranks in the skill ends poorly. Could I still use it at a conversation starter as maybe just a jumping off point?