4 ms·
There is no moral imperative, outside of general moral prohibitions that guide you to do your best to avoid killing the same species. Medically, there is the r
by Prickle 3y ago
There is no moral imperative, outside of general moral prohibitions that guide you to do your best to avoid killing the same species.
Medically, there is the risk of Prion disease. This is a major threat to yourself, and in a few cases it is contagious. So you would have the medical imperative to avoid it to keep the people around you safe.
- 93po 3y ago> There is no moral imperative, outside of general moral prohibitions that guide you to do your best to avoid killing the same species. We don't want our future AI overlords to kill us because we're 1000x dumber than them and also not the same species. I think it's only fair for us to extend the same morals to animals.
- Prickle 3y agoWell no. That depends on whether our future AI overlords need to eat us or not. The issue, at least for eating animals or humans is a need for sustenance.
- 93po 3y agoI'm more alluding to what the other comment did - it's about resources. The AGI has its own goals and values and it'd accomplish them a lot faster without 6 billion humans using all the electricity and natural resources and space and asking it stupid questions about how to write their term papers.
- ornornor 3y agoYou can sustain yourself perfectly without eating any animal or animal byproduct. In rich developed countries where alternatives are findable, there is just no need for animal products. In less developed countries, it would also be achievable if priorities were set to do so. There is nothing inherently difficult about not eating animal products except access to the alternatives.
- ace_of_spades 3y agook, I will bite for this one. As someone enjoying a vegan lifestyle, I am living proof that humans do not need to eat other animals. Also if we would stop the cruel practice of factory farming, it’s common knowledge that we would have more calories available for us humans. In terms of sustenance, we are going out of our way to hurt humans and other animals to uphold the entrenched consumption patterns of a select few. I think for AI overlords the question will be quite similar… how should we use the resources which we have available? Who is worthy of consideration and who is not? At the moment, we are truly not making a great case for keeping us around because anything we can do, they can do better. So why keep us around if not for some ethical insight?
- elzbardico 3y agoWhether we would want it or not, I suspect it would be completely irrelevant to them.
- 93po 3y agoAgreed, in the same way most humans don't care about the animal's thoughts on being eaten.