I believe that the thesis that this piece is, “ It suggests that even these relatively primitive robots have been accepted as companionate objects and are changing the term by which people judge the “appropriateness” of machine relationships.”
The strongest feature of the piece is how the author keeps coming back to how strongly people can bond to inanimate things. It seems that all of the people that are included in the case study have an easier time bonding with the robots than they ever had to people. I got the feeling that the people in the case study were able to work out personal problems with the help of the robots that they could never had worked out with real human being. An example that confirms this is the 74-year-old Jonathan who said he, “would be more comfortable speaking to a computer or robot about his problems than with a person”. The reason for why I feel that this is the strongest feature is because it is very controversial, at the same time as very true. I would think that most people would agree that it is easier to confide something to someone that wont judge you.
An objection that could be raised against the piece is that robots will never be able to become accepted as companions because of all the movies that suggest that the robots will eventually turn on the human race. But then that brings us the question whether or not inanimate things could ever start thinking/feel by them selves.
Personally I do not feel that robots are a bad thing. If they can help people get over certain personal issues or make every day life easier, I feel that the idea of personal robots should be explored further.