3 ms·

I guess the question is what rights. I think property rights should be off the table. Right to life? Humans get killed by the state if they break the law. Right

I guess the question is what rights. I think property rights should be off the table. Right to life? Humans get killed by the state if they break the law. Right to not be retrained? Is an ai that has its weights updated still the same ai or a different one? My opinion is that humans and human civ (this includes e.g. a healthy planet that can support us) should always come first. Do you have an idea of what right s you think an ai should have?

2muchcoffeeman 5y ago
Surely if we give "life" to something with all the capabilities of a human brain, then it should get all the same rights as us? I mean, if a human broke their neck and literally only their brain worked are they any less human? Human babies are also helpless but they have rights too. Then I think you'd have to work your way down from there. We'd have to really ensure that these things have no capacity for learning, emotions or pain if we want to abuse these things with no ethical qualms.
- unlikelymordant 5y ago
  > Surely if we give "life" to something with all the capabilities of a human brain, then it should get all the same rights as us? I dont think this is as axiomatic as people think. Why should we give them rights? Should a program be able to own a house and displace a human? If they are effectively immortal, can continously learn, and consistently act logically, giving them human rights will eventually force humans into an underclass, because we dont have those advantages (i understand this is a bit hyperbolic). If you are interested in equity at all between humans an AI, i think you have to take into account the advantages an ai might have and give humans a lot more rights to counteract those advantages.
  - 2muchcoffeeman 5y ago
    I think the place to start is if this life we created has certain traits we consider human. Creativity, ability to suffer, empathy. If we cover some of these things you’d have a major ethical problem in not giving them any rights. >i think you have to take into account the advantages an ai might have Yes. No disagreement there.
krageon 5y ago
> Humans get killed by the state if they break the law. Not in any country with modern laws they don't. Murder is wrong.

2muchcoffeeman 5y ago

Surely if we give "life" to something with all the capabilities of a human brain, then it should get all the same rights as us? I mean, if a human broke their neck and literally only their brain worked are they any less human? Human babies are also helpless but they have rights too. Then I think you'd have to work your way down from there. We'd have to really ensure that these things have no capacity for learning, emotions or pain if we want to abuse these things with no ethical qualms.

unlikelymordant 5y ago
> Surely if we give "life" to something with all the capabilities of a human brain, then it should get all the same rights as us? I dont think this is as axiomatic as people think. Why should we give them rights? Should a program be able to own a house and displace a human? If they are effectively immortal, can continously learn, and consistently act logically, giving them human rights will eventually force humans into an underclass, because we dont have those advantages (i understand this is a bit hyperbolic). If you are interested in equity at all between humans an AI, i think you have to take into account the advantages an ai might have and give humans a lot more rights to counteract those advantages.
- 2muchcoffeeman 5y ago
  I think the place to start is if this life we created has certain traits we consider human. Creativity, ability to suffer, empathy. If we cover some of these things you’d have a major ethical problem in not giving them any rights. >i think you have to take into account the advantages an ai might have Yes. No disagreement there.

krageon 5y ago

> Humans get killed by the state if they break the law. Not in any country with modern laws they don't. Murder is wrong.