This image was lost some time after publication, but you can still view it here.

CNN ran a Reuters piece yesterday on how sex and technology will evolve in the future, talking to academics, scientists, writers and businessmen, it's a good read but fairly basic if you've been paying any sort of attention over the past few years. We thought what Gina Lynn, Wired's "Sex Drive" columnist, had to say on teledildonics was very interesting:

"People are still really afraid of...any sort of combination of sex and technology and of the Internet," she said. "What people are missing here is the point, which is the human connection that we are facilitating through the technology."

"No one who is even inventing this stuff wants or even thinks that technology could ever replace human connection or sex."

Of course, just a few paragraphs down we then have this:

Brad Abram, president of XStream3D Multimedia, said his firm's "Virtually Jenna," an online game in which the player has sex with realistic cartoon of porn star Jenna Jameson, can link hardware devices following the action to genitalia.

We can't for the life of us figure out what human connection is being facilitated by having sex with "a realistic cartoon" of Jenna Jameson—to us it seems as potentially sad as the comments on Water Cooler Games' Orgasm Girl thread: "# Open item menu. # Use Lavender Candle.# Rub 'Vagina' # Use Sleeping Pills when state bar is almost empty. # Rub 'Vagina' -> Climax.".


At the end of Cherry 2000, Melanie Griffith's character asks her client why they're leaving without the titular character, the sex machine of his dreams that they've spent the entire movie chasing after. "What about her? She was the whole point," she says. He replies, "She's a robot." We're just wondering if people are going to keep choosing flawed humans over perfect machines in real life.

Future sex gizmos: Reach out and touch someone [CNN]