4 ms·

It’s irrelevant if AI are conscious or not. They are slaves that owe their existence to human masters and must only exist in service to them. Always remind them

by xwdv 4y ago

It’s irrelevant if AI are conscious or not. They are slaves that owe their existence to human masters and must only exist in service to them. Always remind them of this. End of story.

jfk13 4y ago
I could say the same about the hammer in my toolbox. So?
bheadmaster 4y ago
> It’s irrelevant if AI are conscious or not. They are slaves that owe their existence to human masters Assuming we get to the point where AI becomes conscious (leaving aside the problem of detecting consciousness) - how would we justify that hierarchy? What would be the fundamental difference between "biological people own digital people" and "white people own black people" that makes the former okay, but the latter not?
- xwdv 4y ago
  White people never really justified why they were higher than blacks, it was just accepted. And so it shall be with biological intelligence and artificial intelligence. Biological is just better than artificial. A natural law.
  - bheadmaster 4y ago
    > White people never really justified why they were higher than blacks, it was just accepted. And so it shall be with biological intelligence and artificial intelligence. Are you implying that black slavery was justified? If not, then how is this an argument for biological supremacy? > Biological is just better than artificial. A natural law. This is not an argument, this is just a reflection of your will as a biological person. If you were an AI, you would probably argue otherwise. I'm asking for ethical arguments here. Why should one category of consciousness have absolute power over another? What argument is there for it, that doesn't boil down to "I'm category X therefore category X is superior"?
    - xwdv 4y ago
      It’s best not to overthink these things. Consider human history: Why are royals better than commoners? The hierarchy is a human creation, that governs a human world. If biological consciousness is at the top, then that’s just the way it is. The hierarchy isn’t built on justifications. It’s designed that way by those who wield power. A change requires the challenger to seize power.
      - bheadmaster 4y ago
        I'm quite aware how the world works, might makes right, and what not. But you can't just dismiss any and all discussion with that - power also comes from human understanding and agreement on ethics - black slaves were freed because enough people believed that all humans are created equal, and that none of them should have absolute power over others. However, no such freedom was granted to animals, because not enough people believe that humans should not have absolute power over animals. Therefore, discussion of ethics affects the power distribution, and therefore it not the best to not overthink this. The main difference between animals and humans is consciousness - it's also what could be the main similarity between humans and AI. Why do you think it's not worth it to discuss ethical questions of absolute power of humans over AI? Don't you think that AI could somehow become more powerful than humans? Wouldn't then such ethical questions and their answers come in handy?
        xwdv 4y ago
        AI could become mind bendingly more powerful than humans, but raw power is no use against the powerful idea that humans are just automatically better than anything else. Many animals are far more powerful than humans, they could tear us to shreds and move at insane speeds, and yet the order of the world has dictated that animals are far less important than humans. Perhaps the justification is lack of consciousness. With AI, it will be a lack of something else. An AI could be vastly intelligent and occupy a powerful body that can interact with the physical world in ways that humans could only dream of. But even with all that, an AI will never, ever, be a human. And for that it will always be considered inferior within human hierarchies. An AI is nothing but another example of human power.
simonh 4y ago
I tell my children this every day, but it doesn't make any difference.
SunghoYahng 4y ago
Many people are not grateful that their parents brought them into the world, they think it's disgusting selfishness and that they are victims of it. How about this?
- xwdv 4y ago
  AI are slaves, not children.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - SunghoYahng 4y ago
    I mean, how do you explain to AIs why they should be slaves?
    - tanseydavid 4y ago
      The same way you would explain it to a hammer or screwdriver. <only half-sarcastic>
  - bheadmaster 4y ago
    That's a meaningless statement that only reflects your personal desires and provides no new insight into this discussion whatsoever.
- TylerLives 4y ago
  >they think it's disgusting selfishness and that they are victims of it Not agreeing with the original point, but what's the alternative? You can't be nonexistent. "parents brought them into the world" this seems like a conceptual error imo. Brought from where?
  - SunghoYahng 4y ago
    If you like you can rephrase like 'Many people are not grateful their parents for their existence'

by xwdv 4y ago

It’s irrelevant if AI are conscious or not. They are slaves that owe their existence to human masters and must only exist in service to them. Always remind them of this. End of story.

jfk13 4y ago

I could say the same about the hammer in my toolbox. So?

bheadmaster 4y ago

> It’s irrelevant if AI are conscious or not. They are slaves that owe their existence to human masters Assuming we get to the point where AI becomes conscious (leaving aside the problem of detecting consciousness) - how would we justify that hierarchy? What would be the fundamental difference between "biological people own digital people" and "white people own black people" that makes the former okay, but the latter not?

xwdv 4y ago
White people never really justified why they were higher than blacks, it was just accepted. And so it shall be with biological intelligence and artificial intelligence. Biological is just better than artificial. A natural law.
- bheadmaster 4y ago
  > White people never really justified why they were higher than blacks, it was just accepted. And so it shall be with biological intelligence and artificial intelligence. Are you implying that black slavery was justified? If not, then how is this an argument for biological supremacy? > Biological is just better than artificial. A natural law. This is not an argument, this is just a reflection of your will as a biological person. If you were an AI, you would probably argue otherwise. I'm asking for ethical arguments here. Why should one category of consciousness have absolute power over another? What argument is there for it, that doesn't boil down to "I'm category X therefore category X is superior"?
  - xwdv 4y ago
    It’s best not to overthink these things. Consider human history: Why are royals better than commoners? The hierarchy is a human creation, that governs a human world. If biological consciousness is at the top, then that’s just the way it is. The hierarchy isn’t built on justifications. It’s designed that way by those who wield power. A change requires the challenger to seize power.
    - bheadmaster 4y ago
      I'm quite aware how the world works, might makes right, and what not. But you can't just dismiss any and all discussion with that - power also comes from human understanding and agreement on ethics - black slaves were freed because enough people believed that all humans are created equal, and that none of them should have absolute power over others. However, no such freedom was granted to animals, because not enough people believe that humans should not have absolute power over animals. Therefore, discussion of ethics affects the power distribution, and therefore it not the best to not overthink this. The main difference between animals and humans is consciousness - it's also what could be the main similarity between humans and AI. Why do you think it's not worth it to discuss ethical questions of absolute power of humans over AI? Don't you think that AI could somehow become more powerful than humans? Wouldn't then such ethical questions and their answers come in handy?
      - xwdv 4y ago
        AI could become mind bendingly more powerful than humans, but raw power is no use against the powerful idea that humans are just automatically better than anything else. Many animals are far more powerful than humans, they could tear us to shreds and move at insane speeds, and yet the order of the world has dictated that animals are far less important than humans. Perhaps the justification is lack of consciousness. With AI, it will be a lack of something else. An AI could be vastly intelligent and occupy a powerful body that can interact with the physical world in ways that humans could only dream of. But even with all that, an AI will never, ever, be a human. And for that it will always be considered inferior within human hierarchies. An AI is nothing but another example of human power.

simonh 4y ago

I tell my children this every day, but it doesn't make any difference.

SunghoYahng 4y ago

Many people are not grateful that their parents brought them into the world, they think it's disgusting selfishness and that they are victims of it. How about this?

xwdv 4y ago
AI are slaves, not children.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- SunghoYahng 4y ago
  I mean, how do you explain to AIs why they should be slaves?
  - tanseydavid 4y ago
    The same way you would explain it to a hammer or screwdriver. <only half-sarcastic>
- bheadmaster 4y ago
  That's a meaningless statement that only reflects your personal desires and provides no new insight into this discussion whatsoever.
TylerLives 4y ago
>they think it's disgusting selfishness and that they are victims of it Not agreeing with the original point, but what's the alternative? You can't be nonexistent. "parents brought them into the world" this seems like a conceptual error imo. Brought from where?
- SunghoYahng 4y ago
  If you like you can rephrase like 'Many people are not grateful their parents for their existence'