3 ms·

I don't follow. Human life is human life - given exposure to stimuli and infinite time, it develops complex intelligence and sapience that reflects it's surroun

I don't follow. Human life is human life - given exposure to stimuli and infinite time, it develops complex intelligence and sapience that reflects it's surroundings. We experience pain from nerve endings and neurons that frighten us, which we consider inherently bad. We build societies around minimizing pain and optimizing for the human condition. A computer is a field of assignable bits that has a big motorized bit flipper attached to it. We use this to encode text, which then does all sorts of wonderful stuff. When a computer tells me it's experiencing pain, I know it is not. Every law of computer physiology suggests that it is motivated to say this as an attempt to mimic humans rather than an expression of genuine emotion. When my Mac makes the car crash sound, it's a mnemonic for a system crash. When it shows the frowny face on the Finder fellow, I can intuit that my computer is not feeling distressed. If anyone does program an artificial intelligence that can feel pain, it probably deserves to be shut down anyways. There's no point to sapient computational intelligence, it's like granting self-awareness to a rock that eats electricity and shits heat. We'll know we've made sufficiently self-aware computers when their first boot protocol defaults to suicide.

danaris 4y ago
You may or may not believe that AGI is possible or a good idea, but by your arguments, it's clear that you're simply refusing to engage with the topic and scenario presented, which is deeply unhelpful at best.
- smoldesu 4y ago
  Of course I'm refusing it. We're talking about computers, not squirrels gaining the ability to talk and beg for mercy. Computers operate on a certain set of constraints. Unless you can directly identify how AI circumvents those computational constraints, we're at an impasse. Computer cruelty laws don't exist for a reason.

danaris 4y ago

You may or may not believe that AGI is possible or a good idea, but by your arguments, it's clear that you're simply refusing to engage with the topic and scenario presented, which is deeply unhelpful at best.

smoldesu 4y ago
Of course I'm refusing it. We're talking about computers, not squirrels gaining the ability to talk and beg for mercy. Computers operate on a certain set of constraints. Unless you can directly identify how AI circumvents those computational constraints, we're at an impasse. Computer cruelty laws don't exist for a reason.