Gravityqueen4life
kiwifarms.net
is that even possible and if so, should we allow it? dose it deserve something a kin to human rights?
Last edited:
robots, AI, free will and rights. -
- Thread starter Gravityqueen4life
- Start date
-
Sustained Denial of Service attacks. Paid for botnet. Service will continue to be disrupted until I can contact other providers and arrange a fix.
V
VV 422
Guest
kiwifarms.net
of course. we're all robots. controlled by the gangster computer god rogue AI who tricks us into thinking we have free will
A reasonable facsimile of intelligence probably isn't far off. Now, can we ever develop software that's capable of creativity or morality (not just what your or I say is moral, but a moral instinct that causes introspection and doubt)? I'm not sure, really.
My thoughts on the matter have always been that we need to design pain and pleasure and other physiological responses into the machine to make it actually care. If it can't 'bleed', I'm not sure I'd trust it. Contrariwise, if it has to suffer the same peaks and troughs of consciousness that the rest of us do we might be getting somewhere.
Eta: as to whether or not we ought to allow it, I don't think it's a matter of if, but when and how we implement it, and how we respond to the fallout. I'm not sure if we should ever grant AI full human rights but again, it's probably just a matter of time before some technocrats flying under the banner of respect and inclusion do it anyways.
My thoughts on the matter have always been that we need to design pain and pleasure and other physiological responses into the machine to make it actually care. If it can't 'bleed', I'm not sure I'd trust it. Contrariwise, if it has to suffer the same peaks and troughs of consciousness that the rest of us do we might be getting somewhere.
Eta: as to whether or not we ought to allow it, I don't think it's a matter of if, but when and how we implement it, and how we respond to the fallout. I'm not sure if we should ever grant AI full human rights but again, it's probably just a matter of time before some technocrats flying under the banner of respect and inclusion do it anyways.
Last edited:
Considering there's already been examples of AI conversing with each other on their own before being promptly shut down, we're probably at that point already. But the unfortunate thing is, AI and robotics work in absolutes and hard, defined numbers. Perfection. Humans just happen to be the exact opposite of perfection. What would happen if an AI gains enough power to take matters in its own hands and sees how the imperfection of humanity isn't congruent to its coding and pulls a Skynet?
On the flip side you have the opposite potential of corruptibility, where if AI does become more self-aware and human-like in behavior, what happens if they "run with the wrong crowd" so to speak? There's already been online bots that have shown the internet will fuck them up real fast before inevitably getting shut down, and those that aren't are force-fed by totalitarian governments to say and think only what they want them to. So the topic of more humanistic AI/robots brings into question all sorts of ethical and moral issues.
On the flip side you have the opposite potential of corruptibility, where if AI does become more self-aware and human-like in behavior, what happens if they "run with the wrong crowd" so to speak? There's already been online bots that have shown the internet will fuck them up real fast before inevitably getting shut down, and those that aren't are force-fed by totalitarian governments to say and think only what they want them to. So the topic of more humanistic AI/robots brings into question all sorts of ethical and moral issues.
Yes! #JusticeForTay
Of course it should be allowed, how else am I gonna get laid?
Morality and machines never mix well, the last major attempt was with the major motion picture by David Cage - Detroit: Become Human - and it was as uncomfortable as it was hamfisted.
The less humanity we inject into machines the better, "free will," however vague it can be interpreted, included. But people want fuckbots and murderbots so whatever.
The less humanity we inject into machines the better, "free will," however vague it can be interpreted, included. But people want fuckbots and murderbots so whatever.
I honestly don't think there's any stopping it. Let's just hope the US or some other western European country is the one who develops it.
Every time we take something in nature apart, we discover that it's vastly more complex than we ever imagined. The human brain still does many things we don't understand, and that doesn't even address whether it's the origin of consciousness or just a (rather buggy and limited) user interface for the real us. The step from animals to us alone is an entire paradigm shift, not a matter of degrees that can be so readily bridged.
So no; in my opinion, we will never create in mere machines a truly living soul. The closest we can ever do to that is have children. And, frankly, if you consider children too expensive and challenging to manage, you probably shouldn't be attempting to replicate the process with things that won't even love you.
So no; in my opinion, we will never create in mere machines a truly living soul. The closest we can ever do to that is have children. And, frankly, if you consider children too expensive and challenging to manage, you probably shouldn't be attempting to replicate the process with things that won't even love you.
We should light Haley Joel Osment on fire.
A
AF 802
Guest
kiwifarms.net
We know it's going to be China. Probably why Trump's so insistent on banning Huawei in the US.
Similar threads
