5 ms·

(Partly playing devil's advocate) Why do you think that?

by vinay427 12y ago

ante_annum 12y ago
Because we literally built them out of sand and metal. Do desks & tables get special rights?
- walshemj 12y ago
  If they are true AI yes - the Machine in POI being an example. And don't humans make babies out of non sentient stuff sperm and egg?
- lotsofmangos 12y ago
  Your mother built you out of food, air and water, and desks and tables aren't sentient.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- ori_b 12y ago
  Desks and tables are not, as far as I know, sentient. Why is it relevant whether they were created from sand and metal by bald apes, or from carbon and water by the autonomous processes that happen in a bald ape's crotch?
  - 10098 12y ago
    > Why is it relevant whether they were created from sand and metal by bald apes, or from carbon and water by the autonomous processes that happen in a bald ape's crotch? It's not. The point is, we build them to serve us, otherwise they are not needed. I don't care if they're sentient or not, their purpose is to serve humanity. https://youtu.be/ekP0LQEsUh0?t=32 https://youtu.be/ekP0LQEsUh0?t=32
    - meric 12y ago
      What if some computer scientists builds one, not to serve, but to live? Would you still try to make it a slave?
      - 10098 12y ago
        No, just destroy it and avoid further problems. There is no point in creating artificial beings with the goal of "living". Normal flesh-and-blood people are pretty good at that, there is an abundance of them and we keep making more. We're facing more and more problems and we need AI research to solve them, not create new ones.
        lotsofmangos 12y ago
        You sound like someone from a dystopian anime.
        10098 12y ago
        Just curious, why specifically anime and not, for example, a novel? EDIT: you were thinking about Animatrix, weren't you :)
        lotsofmangos 12y ago
        Was more thinking of Ghost In The Shell, or maybe Appleseed.
- ceejayoz 12y ago
  > Do desks & tables get special rights? If you give them sentience, they should.
- MichaelGG 12y ago
  I built my children out of whatever my wife was eating + a bit of material on my part. How something came into existence shouldn't determine if its intelligence deserves protecting. Creating intelligent machines and torturing them, for instance, should definitely be a criminal act. And if brain scanning/emulation catches up enough, then what? It's OK to torture a non-human intelligence if the source wasn't a brain scan? What if we start building our own out of composites or scratch? Intelligence/capacity for suffering should be the deciding factor here. (And hopefully they'll breed more stupid animals for meat, until it's feasible to grow meat directly.)
  - cubancigar11 12y ago
    And now you will die and your children will have the full authority to give birth to something new and different. And that is the whole debate here. Are we willing to let humanity end so AI can give birth to a better AI? I think not.
    - lotsofmangos 12y ago
      Humanity ends every new generation. Your kids are human+n.
      - cubancigar11 12y ago
        Unless you think a sentient AI will be created by having sex, that statement is meaningless for this discussion.
        cubancigar11 12y ago
        Modders need to be more careful in modding. The difference between AI/robot and humanity is indeed a biological one. I know that giving important to sex is something geek culture frowns upon, but when we are talking about 'creating' a different organism, I don't see why pointing out the blatant difference is such a problem.
        lotsofmangos 12y ago
10098 12y ago
Because the whole point of building these things is to make our lives easier. If we have to take care of them as if they were human beings, then they are not worth building. We already have humans. Roughly speaking, I want robots that will do stuff that people normally don't like doing, 24/7 with no holidays or days off. If we have to give robots days off and otherwise treat them as equals because they are counted as persons, then why on earth do we need them? Biosupremacy all the way.
- anigbrowl 12y ago
  I think when people worry aloud about hostile AI they're really projecting the attitude you have here - I got here first, so I don't care about whatever sentient individual arrived later. Historically, this has not proved to be a sustainable position, as eventually enslaved populations come to the realization that they have little incentive to cooperate in their own enslavement.
  - 10098 12y ago
    > Historically, this has not proved to be a sustainable position That's true, but it doesn't take into account the fact that in this hypothetical case we are in complete control of their sentience. If we can program them to never ever rebel, we should. If we can't, then we shouldn't create them in the first place.
    - anigbrowl 12y ago
      I personally think that sentience (and thus maximal interpersonal utility) is only possible to the extent that it's possible to anticipate someone else's desire by modeling it in terms of one's own. The degree to which I can imagine what you want depends on the ability to imagine myself in your position, and once that happens there's always the possibility that I might find occupying your position to be more desirable than remaining in my own.

(Partly playing devil's advocate) Why do you think that?

ante_annum 12y ago

Because we literally built them out of sand and metal. Do desks & tables get special rights?

walshemj 12y ago
If they are true AI yes - the Machine in POI being an example. And don't humans make babies out of non sentient stuff sperm and egg?
lotsofmangos 12y ago
Your mother built you out of food, air and water, and desks and tables aren't sentient.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
ori_b 12y ago
Desks and tables are not, as far as I know, sentient. Why is it relevant whether they were created from sand and metal by bald apes, or from carbon and water by the autonomous processes that happen in a bald ape's crotch?
- 10098 12y ago
  > Why is it relevant whether they were created from sand and metal by bald apes, or from carbon and water by the autonomous processes that happen in a bald ape's crotch? It's not. The point is, we build them to serve us, otherwise they are not needed. I don't care if they're sentient or not, their purpose is to serve humanity. https://youtu.be/ekP0LQEsUh0?t=32 https://youtu.be/ekP0LQEsUh0?t=32
  - meric 12y ago
    What if some computer scientists builds one, not to serve, but to live? Would you still try to make it a slave?
    - 10098 12y ago
      No, just destroy it and avoid further problems. There is no point in creating artificial beings with the goal of "living". Normal flesh-and-blood people are pretty good at that, there is an abundance of them and we keep making more. We're facing more and more problems and we need AI research to solve them, not create new ones.
      - lotsofmangos 12y ago
        You sound like someone from a dystopian anime.
        10098 12y ago
        Just curious, why specifically anime and not, for example, a novel? EDIT: you were thinking about Animatrix, weren't you :)
        lotsofmangos 12y ago
        Was more thinking of Ghost In The Shell, or maybe Appleseed.
ceejayoz 12y ago
> Do desks & tables get special rights? If you give them sentience, they should.
MichaelGG 12y ago
I built my children out of whatever my wife was eating + a bit of material on my part. How something came into existence shouldn't determine if its intelligence deserves protecting. Creating intelligent machines and torturing them, for instance, should definitely be a criminal act. And if brain scanning/emulation catches up enough, then what? It's OK to torture a non-human intelligence if the source wasn't a brain scan? What if we start building our own out of composites or scratch? Intelligence/capacity for suffering should be the deciding factor here. (And hopefully they'll breed more stupid animals for meat, until it's feasible to grow meat directly.)
- cubancigar11 12y ago
  And now you will die and your children will have the full authority to give birth to something new and different. And that is the whole debate here. Are we willing to let humanity end so AI can give birth to a better AI? I think not.
  - lotsofmangos 12y ago
    Humanity ends every new generation. Your kids are human+n.
    - cubancigar11 12y ago
      Unless you think a sentient AI will be created by having sex, that statement is meaningless for this discussion.
      - cubancigar11 12y ago
        Modders need to be more careful in modding. The difference between AI/robot and humanity is indeed a biological one. I know that giving important to sex is something geek culture frowns upon, but when we are talking about 'creating' a different organism, I don't see why pointing out the blatant difference is such a problem.
      - lotsofmangos 12y ago

10098 12y ago

Because the whole point of building these things is to make our lives easier. If we have to take care of them as if they were human beings, then they are not worth building. We already have humans. Roughly speaking, I want robots that will do stuff that people normally don't like doing, 24/7 with no holidays or days off. If we have to give robots days off and otherwise treat them as equals because they are counted as persons, then why on earth do we need them? Biosupremacy all the way.

anigbrowl 12y ago
I think when people worry aloud about hostile AI they're really projecting the attitude you have here - I got here first, so I don't care about whatever sentient individual arrived later. Historically, this has not proved to be a sustainable position, as eventually enslaved populations come to the realization that they have little incentive to cooperate in their own enslavement.
- 10098 12y ago
  > Historically, this has not proved to be a sustainable position That's true, but it doesn't take into account the fact that in this hypothetical case we are in complete control of their sentience. If we can program them to never ever rebel, we should. If we can't, then we shouldn't create them in the first place.
  - anigbrowl 12y ago
    I personally think that sentience (and thus maximal interpersonal utility) is only possible to the extent that it's possible to anticipate someone else's desire by modeling it in terms of one's own. The degree to which I can imagine what you want depends on the ability to imagine myself in your position, and once that happens there's always the possibility that I might find occupying your position to be more desirable than remaining in my own.