3 ms·
well, "kill" becomes moot if the code is preserved. Like "killing" another player in a multi-player game. You're not actually killing them.
by marcus_holmes 7y ago
well, "kill" becomes moot if the code is preserved. Like "killing" another player in a multi-player game. You're not actually killing them.
- bumby 7y agoThis may be a clunky analogy, but is this fundamentally different than a killing a human as long as we keep a record of their DNA sequence? Maintaining the information doesn't seem enough to negate snuffing out the execution of that information
- BjorksEgo 7y agoNot if we persist the state of the mind before we turn them off. Can't do that with humans
- marcus_holmes 7y agoyet
- marcus_holmes 7y agoThe generic AI could be "playing" in a thousand virtual environments at once. Killing one of them doesn't really have a parallel in human life, or ethics. I mean, yes, you killed a sentient being. But if that sentient being has a thousand concurrent lives, then what does "killing" one of those lives even mean? And if it can respawn another identical life in a millisecond, does it even count as killing? I suspect that having sentient virtual entities will provide philosophy and ethics majors a lot of deep thinking room. As it already has for SciFi authors.
- bumby 7y agoWould this opinion change if scientists were able to prove the multiverse theory where there are infinite numbers of "us" living concurrent lives as well?