Beawulf Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 All the talk of self replicating robots got me thinking. At what stage should we class advanced technologies as being alive, should we grant them rights? what rights would they have? a story in the Animatrix movie came to mind where the robot killed to protect it's own existence. If we give something the ability to learn and expand its knowledge and an awareness of it's existence have we given up the right to take this away. the tng episode "measure of a man" tackles this issue with regards to data, and it is deemed that he fullfills the conditions of life and is granted the same rights as humans. I think that whenever oppression exists there will eventually be a struggle for freedom. I beleive that would be true for any situation involving a certain level intelligence, human or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TetsuoShima Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 All the talk of self replicating robots got me thinking. At what stage should we class advanced technologies as being alive, should we grant them rights? what rights would they have? a story in the Animatrix movie came to mind where the robot killed to protect it's own existence. If we give something the ability to learn and expand its knowledge and an awareness of it's existence have we given up the right to take this away. the tng episode "measure of a man" tackles this issue with regards to data, and it is deemed that he fullfills the conditions of life and is granted the same rights as humans. I think that whenever oppression exists there will eventually be a struggle for freedom. I beleive that would be true for any situation involving a certain level intelligence, human or not. Quite right! Therefore it would be very unwise for humans to develop a self-aware organism at this stage in our evolution, since we can't even get along with our own kind, we have a very great likelyhood of not getting along with other intelligences. And from the uncorrupted and fair pov, it would be quite dreadfull to take awareness away once it has been given, I quite agree with that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolcat13 Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 One of the many ways that man can fail is to create an intelligence in something that may figure out that man is himself not so intelligent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TetsuoShima Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 One of the many ways that man can fail is to create an intelligence in something that may figure out that man is himself not so intelligent Oh, but you're wrong, the average man is quite intelligent, unfortunately the average man is also quite stupid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beawulf Posted June 9, 2005 Author Share Posted June 9, 2005 One of the many ways that man can fail is to create an intelligence in something that may figure out that man is himself not so intelligent Oh, but you're wrong, the average man is quite intelligent, unfortunately the average man is also quite stupid! hehe, what's that saying... individuals are smart but the masses are stupid. I think coolcat was saying that our creation may come to the conclusion that we arent intelligent, despite whatever the reality might be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorunNova Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 Ummm... the fact we're talking intelligently on a forum does kind of disqualify us from being 'average', last I checked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TetsuoShima Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 One of the many ways that man can fail is to create an intelligence in something that may figure out that man is himself not so intelligent Oh, but you're wrong, the average man is quite intelligent, unfortunately the average man is also quite stupid! hehe, what's that saying... individuals are smart but the masses are stupid. I think coolcat was saying that our creation may come to the conclusion that we arent intelligent, despite whatever the reality might be Ah, I misunderstood. Guess I'm not that intelligent myself then eh! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maverick Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 One of the many ways that man can fail is to create an intelligence in something that may figure out that man is himself not so intelligent Oh, but you're wrong, the average man is quite intelligent, unfortunately the average man is also quite stupid! hehe, what's that saying... individuals are smart but the masses are stupid. I think coolcat was saying that our creation may come to the conclusion that we arent intelligent, despite whatever the reality might be Ah, I misunderstood. Guess I'm not that intelligent myself then eh! :D intellegence is a man made concept. perhaps animals look at us and think we're as thick as two short planks :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oma Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 Eh..? A lot of life isn't intelligent. In fact, most living organisms (at least in numbers) don't even have neurons. So a definition of artificial life = self-replicating abilities?? Definition of sentient artificial life = uh...bugger! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorunNova Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 I figure that if an artificial intelligence begins to think about independance for itself, it has proven it is intelligent enough to be treated as a new lifeform right there and then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soulreaper Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 I concur with TetsuoShima in that that: 1) We should NOT try to create new life while "we" don't understand ourselves or the nature around us (Hell a great deal of the Earth isn't even mapped yet) 2) If we were to create artificial life I think due to the so called "human nature" it should (in regards to #1) in that case it be created be kept at a low-sentience level meaning A) it won't wipe us out .B) we won't tick it off 3) So far in regards to #1 and #2 there isn't much use for humanoid AI's. Sure one could debate that they could do all the dirty work etc. etc. etc. but in regards to the other #s I think that would surely lead to misabuse of such life in different ways like doing dirty work, war machines, replacing human workforce due to the capitalistic and inhuman values in the world. Thus again creating a GAP of slavery or "racism" and those are something I for one have had enough of (human folly and even worse the acceptence of it and the abscence of doing something about it) 4) Illustrated Science (Illustrerad Vetenskap), a very good and highly serious scientific magazine we have in Sweden pointed towards ideas about fusing man and machine rather than create possible conflict outcomes pointed in the earlier #s (Also see Terminator, RoboCop, Animatrix, The Matrix etc.). That is something I think could go well IF and WHEN the "childishness" and "child-deseases" have been taken care of (mental evolution etc.) within OURSELVES. So far I've witnessed an overwhelming number both here and in the so called REAL WORLD where such questions are looked upon in scorn and most often ignored. That ignorance is one of the worst things overall. But majority speaks and so far it's far more self-destructive than anything else - however THAT is also something that tends to be ignored within itself. Though I think that it'd be even better expanding in evolutionary science like GENES and that kind of thing - upgrading us organically FIRST and then perhaps further enhance with some form of machinery (hey we don't want to lose our humanity do we?) Again, I'm leaning towards speaking FOR a Trekkish utopia when stating this. hm.. Earth needs to UNIFY not diversify - that is also something I've had more than enough of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c4evap Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 ntellegence is a man made concept. perhaps animals look at us and think we're as thick as two short planks :p Whoa there fella. Let's not be giving planks a bad name. :p c4 B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elderbear Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 intellegence is a man made concept. perhaps animals look at us and think we're as thick as two short planks Dolphins always look like they're having a heck of a lot more fun than I generally have - and who's to say they're not intelligent, self-reflective creatures? And my dog!!! He just sits around all day, occasionally rebooting my computer, getting loved and petted and fed. I think you'd be right about any animal who can evaluate things ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elderbear Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 arth needs to UNIFY not diversify - that is also something I've had more than enough of. As long as unity is the voluntary unity of diverse beings, rather than a bunch of ideal clones bopping around ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beawulf Posted June 15, 2005 Author Share Posted June 15, 2005 upgrading our genes, no there's a can of worms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorunNova Posted June 15, 2005 Share Posted June 15, 2005 Well, given the first step in 'upgrading our genes' would be to cure hereditary diseases... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beawulf Posted June 16, 2005 Author Share Posted June 16, 2005 I agree we should definately do that. Was watching a documentary about the black death and its similarities with aids. apparently alot of the peolpe that survived the plague had a gene (cant remember its name now) that prevented the virus from entering into the white blood cells and travelling to the lymphatic nodes apparently the people who have inherited this gene from both their parents is immune to the aids virus becuase it also tries to enter into the white blood cells. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GorunNova Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Hmmm... maybe a bubonic plague vaccine would protect against AIDS, then? Riiight... they would have stumbled across that by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BorisP Posted June 18, 2005 Share Posted June 18, 2005 All the talk of self replicating robots got me thinking. At what stage should we class advanced technologies as being alive, should we grant them rights? what rights would they have? a story in the Animatrix movie came to mind where the robot killed to protect it's own existence. If we give something the ability to learn and expand its knowledge and an awareness of it's existence have we given up the right to take this away. not. The stage they are classified as being alive is when they stop obeying your orders. Did you ever wonder about fiction writing? Where do you think the inspiration comes from? It comes from the world of humans around us. When you read a book about alternate dimensions, it is not alternate physical dimensions they are talking about. If you are a yuppie and I take you downtown to homeless town, for all intents and purposes you have entered an alternate dimension. You don't understand the people, you don't understand the rules. All books, sci fi included are attempts to describe what is going on in the human world around us. Using this idea, what is a robot? A robot is a real life human being who obeys other people. Sort of like sheeple. If you are a writer and you put in your book "Should a sheeple who has been made self aware be allowed to be part of the human race?", people get angry. They don't want to admit that maybe they or a family member is a robot, a sheeple that takes orders and does what it is told. In order to help people, you have to lie to them constantly. If you tell them the truth, they get mad and want to fight. I don't know if I did it here. Did you know that Zombies are people? Just like I described above, a Zombie is a word writers use to describe a certain type of human being that displays certain types of characteristics. In other forums where I expressed this idea? People got mad. They are afraid they might be a Zombie. They didn't want me to explain how to differentiate a Zombie from other humans because they were afraid I would point at them and say Zombie. I have to lie, or I have to completely stop talking about the issue because people do not want to hear reality. I got about 20 or 25 fantastic pictures of Zombies. Some special effects guys made them up for a movie. Since the special effects guys could see they were Zombies, they put the make up on them to match what the artists see. The make up jobs are just about perfectly matched to what the person really looks like to those who can see Zombies. Here is where people jump up and say "Oh. So you think you are special? You think you got better eyes or more brains than the rest of us because you can see Zombies?". What do you want me to say? If I have a college degree, the majority of society will agree that I am better than a person with no college degree. You may not like it that I can see things you can't. What can I do about it besides wait for you to grow up and be able to deal with your jealousy and envy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beawulf Posted June 19, 2005 Author Share Posted June 19, 2005 Hmmm... maybe a bubonic plague vaccine would protect against AIDS' date=' then? Riiight... they would have stumbled across that by now.[/quote'] it isnt a vaccine at this stage, it is a gene called among other things CCR5 that occurs in some populations. and they have stumbled accross this, that is why I am mentioning it :p news report this isnt where I heard about it, but it is the first of many pages that came up when I googled it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now