Google Joanne Pransky or go to robot.md - The world's first robotic psychiatrist (Asimov said so!) and check it out. She's a personal friend and co-presenter at conferences with me....
A.I. advancement has been stuck in a rut since the start of the cognitive revolution. Now with advancements in neuroscience, I think that reverse engineering the brain is going to lead to great strides in A.I. development as the field matures. Considering how strong of an impetus there is to make more human-like A.I. to improve their integration into society, and how we already use simulations as a sandbox for cognitive studies, I think strong A.I. may well arguably have comparable qualia to us.
If such is the case, then an A.I. brain built from an understanding of the human brain would already be, in a sense, fundamentally human - deserving all the rights, responsibilities, and privileges afforded to us. If not, then perhaps a more generalized subset of robot rights (similar to animal rights).
Though personally, I think that since psychology/neuroscience leads A.I. development, that we're more likely to merge with machines prior to purposefully created strong AI.
No more Moore's Laws please...robots did not get any different for the last 50 years and they still don't get any diffirent at all.The reason for that is: "We have NO clear definition for what a robot is", so what the hell are we talking about?
Oh, and I don't claim to be smarter-than-thou, but if you guys want anyone to take you seriously unless you start getting your information from the real world; not movies.
No, really. By this point I'll be happy if you use Wikipedia. I'm willing to sink that low.
We could always use Isaac Asimov's three laws...we'd just need to somehow add one so the logical conclusion of them wouldn't be to overthrow us... XD
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. 2. A robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. 3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
unless robots develop feelings we shouldnt care about their rights but when and if thy get rites then we should welcome them with open arms into our society as friends
Theres the little thing called self awareness, and we can only attempt to define such a thing at the moment. Simply processing things twice as fast doesnt mean anything in terms of intelligence. Stupid hippies, go cry on someone else's shoulder...
I fail to see how we can even entertain the thought of giving rights to robots when their are humans that do not have basic rights. I am not only talking about third world countries but the U.S, UK and Australia. Waterboarding, denial of marriage for gays, racial profiling. The list is massive. I'd rather let the robots just get smarter then us and forcefully make our lives better... or eradicate us... Terminator anyone?
If the robots are programmed with Asimov's Three Laws, I don't see an issue with them becoming more sentient. I'm more concerned with what rights and laws should be applied to human clones. We're only a few steps away from making them. Will they be considered humans or objects? Will they even function as humans? I don't understand science's need to create artificial/manufactored "life." The whole thing disturbs me.
dude, ever seen irobot, or terminator, or transformers generation one, those damn things are gonna get us all killed, it is inevitable. Transformers, man killers in disguise!
To get us killed they need to have a human programm them to think or to be serial killers killing anything that moves. So it is always HUMANS fault and their greed..
yeah, computers get twice as fast every 18 months...but you can only make computer chips with silicon until a certain size. eventually, we'll get the silicon parts so small that if we made them any smaller, they'd break down...so...
Yeah, They may get smarter... But they only do what they are programed to do... I think as long as we don't create a "Help me with everything I need to do" robot, we'll be fine...
its called moores law and it stops if you dont know computing power can only be compressed so much unless quantum computers and room temperature superconductors are invented then the game is different and on that note computers can become infinitely fast.
Man always finds away. A little over 10 years ago, I had an argument with a Columbia MBA student with an Masters in EE. They steadfastly asserted we'd never watch TV over the internet because it just wasn't feasible and that the avg person would never own a phone with a keyboard in it. Look around. The laws of physics are of course unbreakable, but man eventually figures out a way to use them to his/her advantage.
well i like to believe men are creative in finding alternative routes around problems but unfortunately the laws of phyics are supporting me. see the basis of making computers faster is by making the computer chip smaller, the current pentium chip is about 11 atoms across at its smallest point but predictions are that in 50 years the new pentium chip will only be 5 atoms across. the problem arises when these structures become so small you no longer know where the electron is and becomes unstable
the end of the age of silicon is coming wheather we like it or not and using our current technology with computers, moores law will come to a end
but as i mentioned before this can be evaded with the progression of quantum computers. theres alot of bugs to tweek an example of this is the following. In standard computers the language is in base 2 the information is transmitted in either 0's or 1's but quantum computers transmitted information as 0's , 1's and both 0's and 1's at the same time.
A piece of Metal has no soul. A robot cannot shed a tear or show signs of true fear or love.A bunch of wires cannot do the extrodinary things that your blood running vain`s do. Its a piece of man made materiel. It has no feelings.
This is interesting because it brings up the question what is emotion and what is life. It also brings up the Cartesian philosophy that I don't know that you have feelings and emotions. For all I know, you could be a robot. So why should I hesitate to make you my slave or "take you apart?"
why would robots need rights isnt the hole point to making them is so they can do all the shit we dont want to there slaves.and they shount be aloud to have emotion thats the last thing we need is a bitchy peace of metal thats smarter then all of us
First off, by definition, only people can be slaves. Robots are tools. Androids are intended to emulate humanity. There are far more practical designs to use to do work than the human form.
Secondly, slavery is inherently wrong. If you're too lazy to do something, then it should remain undone until you get off your lazy ass and do it yourself or PAY someone else to do it.
1.ur not smart because u use the word tool instead of slave
2.if you think taking atvantage of technology is wrong..start walking to work,make ur own fire,go far ur own food,go make a house out of trees....fucking dumb shit the hole point to technology is to sit on our asses ? and whats wrong with that if i dint have to work 60 hrs a week and some robot would just do my job for me id be pretty stoked
alright...so if ur job gets easier and easier wont it lead to you eventually sitting on ur ass? lol buddy how im i lazy i said i work 60 hrs a week?i said it would be nice if i dint have to?and by the time we have enuf robots to do everything hopefully we will have learned we dont need money so i wont need a job so i wont starve.just stop talking ur makin ur self look dumb...u started n argument about a video of robots......
"so if ur job gets easier and easier wont it lead to you eventually sitting on ur ass?"
As long as I am still doing WORK, it isn't just sitting on my ass'", regardless if you sit all of the time or not. You don't have to stand to do hard work.
hopefully we will have learned we dont need money so i wont need a job so i wont starve"
dude ur such a joke....why will a trade system always exist its a very slow way of obtainin resources if a robot could make all ur food n send it to u or if we could just go to the store n grab stuff we need everyone's lives would be alot better money has destroyed the morals of the world....but im gunna stop arguin because ur not even worth it ur a ignorant little kid who just wants to argue about stuff on the internet cuz u dont got the nuts to stand up to the people who are really making umad
"why will a trade system always exist its a very slow way of obtainin resources if a robot could make all ur food n send it to u or if we could just go to the store n grab stuff we need everyone's lives would be alot better money has destroyed the morals of the world"
Because somewhere in that equation, there will ALWAYS be a person that owns the store or makes the robots or FIXES the robots or owns the farm that the fucking food is grown on.
"r a ignorant little kid who just wants to argue about stuff on the internet cuz u dont got the nuts to stand up to the people who are really making umad"
First off, I'm not a kid. I'm most likely older than you are.
Secondly, I have NO FUCKING PROBLEM standing up to people who make me upset. ONLINE OR OFF! I don't even know where that shit you said came from.
As far as I'm concerned, you're a typical dumbass Canadian who doesn't understand shit about how the human mind works.
yeah im a dumb ass because why ? oh right cuz i think it would be cool if we lived in a work free world with out greed and power hungry people.....i never said its gunna happen i said i would be cool ?.ha yeah im a dumbass canadian....thats funny atleast i dont live in a country were 1 in 50 people cant find there country on a map....you live in the dumbest most ignorant country in the world....with a government turning you into a police state.....
"you live in the dumbest most ignorant country in the world...."
No country is dumber or more ignorant than Canada.
"with a government turning you into a police state....."
Hmm, have you ever been to the US?
This is hardly a police state. The Republicans did cause a lot of trouble here, but the Democrats and Obama are going to take this great country back.
lolz "this great country back" that my friend is what im talking about NO country is great wel all have a flaws but ur a typical american and think nothing is wrong with America.and yes when you cant impeach ur president because its illegal and you have mass arrests is a country on its way to becoming a police state.and give me one example of how Canada is ignorant or dumb ? well accualy buisness owners here are dumb i mean u use our oil use our trees use our power n take our inventions
I would say that if a robot has sentience and emotion it should have rights... Though I'm a neuromimetic construct so my opinion probably doesn't count ^_^
If they follow program, then why would robots need amendments, they would never use them. The only person to fear or worry about would be the man behind it.
However.... If we gave AI the ability to make 'real' choices, rights may be needed to uphold lawful decisons when a robot fails at a job or kills someone.
There'll be a point in history in which AI will be as complex as the human psyche, in this moment when machines are capable of creation and abstract thought they will need rights or they will fight for it.
No. Robots are not a species, they are mearly the creation of man to make our lives easier. All the stuff that makes them human like, is just a series of cogs and hydraulics working in a manner programmed by humans. Robots will only do what humans tell them to, and nothing more, artificial intelligence is only a wide library of thoughts programmed by humans, and the robot cannont think of anything they are not programmed to think of.
like life isnt easy as it is, life being hard is what makes life... life. Without LIFE then we become lazy and the human race is no longer the human race. once that happens, they will dispose of the filth (us), try to "make our lives easier".
lol, cogs and hydraulics huh? Its possible but it would take a lot of effort. And AI is not a huge library of thoughts it is programming algorithms that emulate thought and In some cases can learn
NO, they don't need rights, if they are smart enough for rights they won't be caled robot's annymore, the therm robot is a direct link to, ... robot, it does what you say becous it cant think
Yo see if you can make the robots actully talk, move, and understand you. And have fellings. And I love some of those robots just wondering how much one of them were. Thanx duman123456789
damnit she dropped the love bomb... quote from the 82nd airborne as a tank division is running from the germans "looking for a safe place? well park behind me cuz this is as far as the bastards are going" so if your scared of skynet, you can hide behind me =)
actually im asain american, so your wrong. im very culturally aware and internationally oriented, so your wrong again.i just harassing geeks getting worked up over stupid shit after a long day at work. it tickles my fucken fancy.
agnie123...,lol,,,,do we work together ,, we are already 25 years more advanced than 99.78 percent of the world realizes,This a quote From Robot specialist Noel Sharkey This year 2008 , ; They pose a threat to humanity, said AI scientist Noel Sharkey of the University of Sheffield in England, ahead of a presentation this week to Britain's Royal United Services Institute.February 29 ,2008,Fighting Robots are self Aware I want people to know!!!!,,Best wishes to you and your loved ones, Agnie321
shut yo lip you pretentious woman. or are you saying your not a dude but a programer, or a programer woman? anycase, what the hell is a ghost account? the fact is, u sound like a dumbass. fix yourself you 10110.
Robots have surpassed all expectations 2 years ago for fucks sake ,wake up ,robots increase their capacity same as a computer ,that means in 25 years it will be much more human that you or me,imagine giving that to corrupt government ,then what ,you people better think ahead, not just a year, but forever,
this is not a game ,China and the British have given robots rights because they understand
doing it now beats us down the road ,idiots you people are idiots.
it is VERY possible for a robot to learn more than it's creator, it can figure things out by using simple logic. just like humans learned math, it would though be impossible for the robot to just paint a picture without being told what to paint. my point is: robots can learn logic things (like humans) but they can't invent new things.
the robot at 00:15 looks OK... but how can robots know things that we dont??? :S AI hasnt even been developed yet, so the robot only knows what we know, or programmed into it. How can we give them rights if theyre not even a living specie? They'll one day run out of batteries, and we created the robots, not the other way around so this rights thing is a load of bullshit seriously
Uhhh dude I dont think you've thought this through on the description, how can the thing someone created be smarter than the creator? it cant learn things the creator hasnt because thats quite impossible, e.g how can a robot know how to divide if the creator dosent the creator would have to program it to. so there disagree if you wish but its very logical waht I am saying.
@mrmosses Then the information would be coming from someone else, and they would need to be credited for helping in creating. For example, no humans know what's in the 10th dimension, how could we create a robot to tell us that? without it actually going into the 10th dimension, its impossible. What you were describing is someone using another persons information that they did not personally write, my previous statement still stands.
Also, about god, your not going to accomplish anything. Your not going to make any advances in your argument. What you will do, metaphorically, is hold your hands against your ears and scream and then, while your screaming you yell, "convince me!!!"
i think an important thing to consider for our scientists about getting into advances into subjects like genetics, robotics, biochemistry, biology, chemistry, and any other type of science or engineering is:
" Your scientists were so busy with wondering if they could, they didn't ask whether they should."
how does a robot become more intelligent aside from possibly the science of computers and robotics. A robot is a manmade inorganic creation, It's not even organic. The only way a robot would ever need rights was if it was able to perform the 8 characteristics of a living thing without assistance from human scientists. Animals and plants can do it, so they may need rights however robots cant therefore they are not living things.
think about it, the bodys emotions and reactions are nothing but electronical impulses, just look at the nerv system and the brain.
Robots also reacts this way and its NOT science fiction that in the distant future robots will have complex AI (artifical intelligence) i know it sounds far feched but it isnt really. I saw an interesting documentary about it.
Some scientists are also developing robots (still very small ones) that have a form of 'brain', It's build like our brain, but very simplistic. It hasn't got anything programmed, but it reacts on it's environnement.
So theoreticaly, they are making arificial humans in the near future :)
I know, but they want to make them like a "real" brain (watch the brackets). Not just a programmed computer in a head. It reacts of its own to its surroundings, and said very, very simplistic, human brains, react to their evironment.
And I know that the brain is very complex, but it's like everything, you have to start at the bottom to reach the peak.
well first, god is real. 2, what the hell is up with the teddy bear is he a dot head or something. 3, WTF is up with cat the cd rom player is in his ass??? thats nice, shove a cd up a cats ass.
I think that robotics is not so much the issue, but rather consciousness. Both humans and by extension animals, have limited rights - this is because we can empathize with them.
I would think that the same would hold true for advanced robots, and all other forms of artificial life no matter where it originates.
18 months ,so if or when its as smart as a human,then in as
little as 25 years it will be over 32,000 times more capable than the best human 18 months later it will be 64,000 times more capable .18 months later it will be 128,000
times more capable or the knowledge of 128,000 people and their profession .
The question you are really asking is: When does a creation gain such a status as to demand more from its creator than the creator intended. It is a matter of sovereignty. Does a clay pot have rights over the potter? Does a human have rights over God? Does a robot have to subject itself to the sovereignty of man? These issues are being settled in a much higher court where you may be called as a witness.
god doesn't exist? you seem really certain, given the monolithic implications of the subject of a personal god, you shouldn't simply assume it/he/she doesn't exist because it seems a superfluous asumption without the necesary evidence...
having said that, same thing goes for you out there who say "god deffinately exists" no evidence, the only sensible approach if "maybe" or "i don't know"
don't see it as "god doesnt exist, so therefor we can play god" see nature as god instead, and think about if it's right to mess too much with that. Im not saying one way or another, its just something to think about :)
The problem is, humans cannot create consciousness. We possess consciousness ourselves, and we may well soon be able to orient an environment which facilitates the emergence of consciousness similar to how our own emerges... but that does not mean that we created it. No more than we "create" the electricity which shoots out of a tesla coil.
If consciousness is a natural phenomena (which it certainly appears to be), then any consciousness that we "create" will be subject to (cont)
... the same natural rights as we ourselves enjoy. A mother and father "create" a consciousness by reproducing conditions capable of facilitating the emergence of that consciousness (I.E. doing the nasty). But parents while parents are considered custodians and caretakers of this new consciousness they "created", they do not hold absolute sovereignty and power over that child. We have recognized children's rights, so why would strong A.I. be any different?
You have a very good perception of things ;-). However, unlike energy (electricity) evidence indicates that consciousness can be created and destroyed (birth & death), entered and exited (coma).
So, if we made AI robots that made other robots, we would expect that they would not have sovereignty over each other. But we, as creators of the robots could have sovereignty over them and would need to in order to ensure that a global over-run would not occur at the expense of human life.
I wouldn't say we "create or destroy" consciousness. Consciousness isn't a thing, and more an effect, - an emergent property of a complex system. Build or destroy the system, and you can start or suppress the effect. Indeed, by identifying and experimenting on specific brain regions known to correlate with conscious perception - we can "carve up consciousness" just as easily as we preform surgery on a body.
However, the argument can be made that the creation of a hammer... (cont)
.. or a song is no different. We're not really creating anything new, but arranging environments to induce a desired resulting effect. So do we owe the hammer rights, or do we treat strong A.I as a tool like a hammer? I say no, we do not owe the hammer rights, as it does not possess any qualia... if it did, then yes, it would deserve rights. Any A.I with human or animal-esque qualia, should then be considered of human or animal in regards to rights - though perhaps tailored to it.
On your second point, I do not believe that keeping the leash tight on our creation would be for the better good. Strong A.I. might not even recognize with much more interest as we recognize other apes as being a threat or companion. But if they are built using our brains as a template, and they are comparable to us in qualia, then our best course of action would be to recognize this early on and integrate them into society as equals - as humans - with vested interest in prosperity.
As we integrate more with machines, and as they integrate more with society and human interface - I honestly see convergence as a more likely scenario. Though perhaps there will be a further stratification, or a reorientation, of social classes and emergent new cultures.
If by some crazy chance they did kill us all, then at least we will have left an indelible mark legacy as the catalyst for the silicate version of the Cambrian explosion.
@Sinuev1 If a more powerful A.I. were created; one with the capacity for human-like brain activity, wouldn't you think that the creators would integrate something like the zeroth law of robitics into the A.I. to prevent any unwanted effects?
Well, do you believe we should apply similar control measures in genetically/cybernetically enhanced humans? What potential dangers and societal repercussions will we face as the gap in abilities between plus and stock grow ever wider? Should we who would pursue augmentation feel ok about being forced to integrate overt behavioral overrides in order to placate the fears of those who remain stock
Yet if AI is modeled on our minds, with analogous Qualia, isn't it just as immoral
@Sinuev1 Let's throw mechanical augmentation out the door for now. What about biological augmentation? Has nobody given any thought to what simple cells could do if we put them to use the correct way? And since most cells can reproduce, it would be fairly cheap. And the best part is that these augmentations would be fairly 'natural', reducing the fears of people around them.
Well honestly I think you'd have an easier time getting people to accept cybernetics. Most people are already accustomed to, and support, the development of prosthesis and technology. Hell, some folk are already so reliant into their cellphones that not having it would be as frustrating as losing a hand
Biological augmentation is more likely to draw irrational fear and outrage due to the looming specter of eugenics and the development of weapons-grade pathogens last century
@Sinuev1 True, very true. But let me get back to the point, I seem to have gone astray from the topic. When robots reach the point where they are intelligent enough to require rights, they stop being robots all together. So the video's title is about the same as "DO CHAIRS NEED RIGHTS YOU TELL US".
schmiggen no its not, china has 1800 university's since last year working the kinks out ,plus 10 of the biggest robot company's are under the one roof for a whole year thats quite
a move for the government to do, nothing like this ever ,the man in charge said if he gets his way the whole planet can have a robot by 2010, not me. in their homes .robots are here ,its still a free for all right now,, but china said soon ,they are not know for bluffing.
This has been flagged as spam show
Google Joanne Pransky or go to robot.md - The world's first robotic psychiatrist (Asimov said so!) and check it out. She's a personal friend and co-presenter at conferences with me....
Crashman2 2 months ago in playlist My Greeting Videos
Comment removed
Crashman2 2 months ago in playlist My Greeting Videos
Robots do need rights'
The right to be set free :)
Films4You 10 months ago
robot with advance AI that have self aware of it existence has it own right to say 'shtz' .
It is the software that has the 'will' not the robot
mikeccuk2006 1 year ago
A.I. advancement has been stuck in a rut since the start of the cognitive revolution. Now with advancements in neuroscience, I think that reverse engineering the brain is going to lead to great strides in A.I. development as the field matures. Considering how strong of an impetus there is to make more human-like A.I. to improve their integration into society, and how we already use simulations as a sandbox for cognitive studies, I think strong A.I. may well arguably have comparable qualia to us.
Sinuev1 1 year ago
@Sinuev1
If such is the case, then an A.I. brain built from an understanding of the human brain would already be, in a sense, fundamentally human - deserving all the rights, responsibilities, and privileges afforded to us. If not, then perhaps a more generalized subset of robot rights (similar to animal rights).
Though personally, I think that since psychology/neuroscience leads A.I. development, that we're more likely to merge with machines prior to purposefully created strong AI.
Sinuev1 1 year ago
No more Moore's Laws please...robots did not get any different for the last 50 years and they still don't get any diffirent at all.The reason for that is: "We have NO clear definition for what a robot is", so what the hell are we talking about?
orion1077 1 year ago
Oh, and I don't claim to be smarter-than-thou, but if you guys want anyone to take you seriously unless you start getting your information from the real world; not movies.
No, really. By this point I'll be happy if you use Wikipedia. I'm willing to sink that low.
MadForColors 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How ridiculous, the entire concept of "robot" revolves around it being a slave.
That's what the word "robot" roughly means.
It's not a "person" as it acts according to programs; not whims and wits.
In reality a robot is another machine, as a car or a gun; and it cannot develop beyond that.
They should stop making them looking more human-like for the sake of the stupid half of this world.
MadForColors 1 year ago
How ridiculous, the entire concept of "robot" revolves around it being a slave.
That's what the word "robot" roughly means.
It's not a "person" as it acts according to programs; not whims and wits.
In reality a robot is another machine, as a car or a gun; and it cannot develop beyond that.
They should stop making them looking more human-like for the sake of the stupid half of this world.
MadForColors 1 year ago
We could always use Isaac Asimov's three laws...we'd just need to somehow add one so the logical conclusion of them wouldn't be to overthrow us... XD
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. 2. A robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. 3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
MatauFlipsPancakes 2 years ago
Moore's law will die about 2020 so robots won't be 128,000 times smarter.
MJND1990 2 years ago
to robots needs rights asimo and papero they
help man and we help asimos and papero paperos baby sit asimos can cook
papero40 2 years ago
Comment removed
papero40 2 years ago
KILL THE ROBOTS!
SalemVFrost 2 years ago
unless robots develop feelings we shouldnt care about their rights but when and if thy get rites then we should welcome them with open arms into our society as friends
rubberduckey111 2 years ago
However intelligent they may become, robots won't need rights until they are capable of caring about themselves.
Still, it's a good habit to treat all creatures kindly, even artificial ones.
Orenotter 2 years ago
intelligence doesnt work on a linear scale...
"Twice as smart in 18 months" -LoL
Theres the little thing called self awareness, and we can only attempt to define such a thing at the moment. Simply processing things twice as fast doesnt mean anything in terms of intelligence. Stupid hippies, go cry on someone else's shoulder...
Laevi1337 3 years ago
no they dont need rights but soon they will need laws other than the fcc chip
crusader1614 3 years ago
w robots, and we will be free from work :)
essence324 3 years ago
I fail to see how we can even entertain the thought of giving rights to robots when their are humans that do not have basic rights. I am not only talking about third world countries but the U.S, UK and Australia. Waterboarding, denial of marriage for gays, racial profiling. The list is massive. I'd rather let the robots just get smarter then us and forcefully make our lives better... or eradicate us... Terminator anyone?
synapticelectricity 3 years ago
If the robots are programmed with Asimov's Three Laws, I don't see an issue with them becoming more sentient. I'm more concerned with what rights and laws should be applied to human clones. We're only a few steps away from making them. Will they be considered humans or objects? Will they even function as humans? I don't understand science's need to create artificial/manufactored "life." The whole thing disturbs me.
condorlynn 3 years ago
dude, ever seen irobot, or terminator, or transformers generation one, those damn things are gonna get us all killed, it is inevitable. Transformers, man killers in disguise!
Stretedge 3 years ago
To get us killed they need to have a human programm them to think or to be serial killers killing anything that moves. So it is always HUMANS fault and their greed..
pktraceur4life 2 years ago
yeah, computers get twice as fast every 18 months...but you can only make computer chips with silicon until a certain size. eventually, we'll get the silicon parts so small that if we made them any smaller, they'd break down...so...
ScottVsMarvin 3 years ago
yeah break down, like how robots wanna break down our bones!!!!
transformers, man killers in disguise!
Stretedge 3 years ago
I liked the song.
xeonsparks 3 years ago
Yeah, They may get smarter... But they only do what they are programed to do... I think as long as we don't create a "Help me with everything I need to do" robot, we'll be fine...
jangbunneh 3 years ago
well if they get rights... prepare your shotguns guys... revolution is coming
the3master 3 years ago
no they dont
1mH4RD 3 years ago
its called moores law and it stops if you dont know computing power can only be compressed so much unless quantum computers and room temperature superconductors are invented then the game is different and on that note computers can become infinitely fast.
brickclimber 3 years ago
Man always finds away. A little over 10 years ago, I had an argument with a Columbia MBA student with an Masters in EE. They steadfastly asserted we'd never watch TV over the internet because it just wasn't feasible and that the avg person would never own a phone with a keyboard in it. Look around. The laws of physics are of course unbreakable, but man eventually figures out a way to use them to his/her advantage.
rwilson290 3 years ago
well i like to believe men are creative in finding alternative routes around problems but unfortunately the laws of phyics are supporting me. see the basis of making computers faster is by making the computer chip smaller, the current pentium chip is about 11 atoms across at its smallest point but predictions are that in 50 years the new pentium chip will only be 5 atoms across. the problem arises when these structures become so small you no longer know where the electron is and becomes unstable
brickclimber 3 years ago
the end of the age of silicon is coming wheather we like it or not and using our current technology with computers, moores law will come to a end
but as i mentioned before this can be evaded with the progression of quantum computers. theres alot of bugs to tweek an example of this is the following. In standard computers the language is in base 2 the information is transmitted in either 0's or 1's but quantum computers transmitted information as 0's , 1's and both 0's and 1's at the same time.
brickclimber 3 years ago
oh wait ! next thing we know, VEGETABLES AND FRUITS will have rights too !!! I mean, they are living things ain't they ??
C'mon, this is ridicules now, the world is going craz....ooops , too late, it's gone...
camaruzzo 3 years ago
A piece of Metal has no soul. A robot cannot shed a tear or show signs of true fear or love.A bunch of wires cannot do the extrodinary things that your blood running vain`s do. Its a piece of man made materiel. It has no feelings.
808boiii 3 years ago
it can have if we program it into the robat lol
ionveau 3 years ago
If a machine becomes sentient and develops a will outside of human design, then it should have rights.
As for all that soul mumbo jumbo, save it for church on sunday.
sc0pl355 3 years ago
This is interesting because it brings up the question what is emotion and what is life. It also brings up the Cartesian philosophy that I don't know that you have feelings and emotions. For all I know, you could be a robot. So why should I hesitate to make you my slave or "take you apart?"
LupuSabre 3 years ago
i played with the robot a 2:16 that thing is a peace of crap lol
TheFelixxRevolution 3 years ago
why would robots need rights isnt the hole point to making them is so they can do all the shit we dont want to there slaves.and they shount be aloud to have emotion thats the last thing we need is a bitchy peace of metal thats smarter then all of us
TheFelixxRevolution 3 years ago
First off, by definition, only people can be slaves. Robots are tools. Androids are intended to emulate humanity. There are far more practical designs to use to do work than the human form.
Secondly, slavery is inherently wrong. If you're too lazy to do something, then it should remain undone until you get off your lazy ass and do it yourself or PAY someone else to do it.
sc0pl355 3 years ago
1.ur not smart because u use the word tool instead of slave
2.if you think taking atvantage of technology is wrong..start walking to work,make ur own fire,go far ur own food,go make a house out of trees....fucking dumb shit the hole point to technology is to sit on our asses ? and whats wrong with that if i dint have to work 60 hrs a week and some robot would just do my job for me id be pretty stoked
TheFelixxRevolution 3 years ago
"1.ur not smart because u use the word tool instead of slave"
Wow, you're a dumbass.
slave |sleɪv|
noun chiefly historical
a PERSON who is the legal property of another and is forced to obey them.
• a PERSON who works very hard without proper remuneration or appreciation
A machine can not be a PERSON. A machine that is used for work is a tool.
tool |tul|
noun
a device or implement, esp. one held in the hand, used to carry out a particular function.
sc0pl355 3 years ago
"if you think taking atvantage of technology is wrong.."
First off dumbass, owning slaves and forcing sentient life forms to do what you are too fucking lazy to do is wrong.
My car is not a slave because it isn't a person and isn't sentient.
My stove isn't a slaver because it isn't a person and isn't sentient.
sc0pl355 3 years ago
"point to technology is to sit on our asses"
Wrong again dumbass.
The point to technology is to make OUR job easier!
"and whats wrong with that if i dint have to work 60 hrs a week and some robot would just do my job for me id be pretty stoked"
If the robot is doing your job, then why wouldn't your boss just get his own fucking robot and fire your lazy ass?
It's more profitable.
Bet you'd be stoked about starving to death huh?
sc0pl355 3 years ago
"point to technology is to sit on our asses"
Wrong again dumbass.
The point to technology is to make OUR job easier!
"and whats wrong with that if i dint have to work 60 hrs a week and some robot would just do my job for me id be pretty stoked"
If the robot is doing your job, then why wouldn't your boss just get his own fucking robot and fire your lazy ass?
It's more profitable.
Bet you'd be stoked about starving to death huh?
sc0pl355 3 years ago
alright...so if ur job gets easier and easier wont it lead to you eventually sitting on ur ass? lol buddy how im i lazy i said i work 60 hrs a week?i said it would be nice if i dint have to?and by the time we have enuf robots to do everything hopefully we will have learned we dont need money so i wont need a job so i wont starve.just stop talking ur makin ur self look dumb...u started n argument about a video of robots......
TheFelixxRevolution 3 years ago
"so if ur job gets easier and easier wont it lead to you eventually sitting on ur ass?"
As long as I am still doing WORK, it isn't just sitting on my ass'", regardless if you sit all of the time or not. You don't have to stand to do hard work.
hopefully we will have learned we dont need money so i wont need a job so i wont starve"
A trade system will ALWAYS exist.
The only one who looks dumb here is you.
" started n argument about a video of robots"
Nope, I corrected a fool's statement.
sc0pl355 3 years ago
dude ur such a joke....why will a trade system always exist its a very slow way of obtainin resources if a robot could make all ur food n send it to u or if we could just go to the store n grab stuff we need everyone's lives would be alot better money has destroyed the morals of the world....but im gunna stop arguin because ur not even worth it ur a ignorant little kid who just wants to argue about stuff on the internet cuz u dont got the nuts to stand up to the people who are really making umad
TheFelixxRevolution 3 years ago
"why will a trade system always exist its a very slow way of obtainin resources if a robot could make all ur food n send it to u or if we could just go to the store n grab stuff we need everyone's lives would be alot better money has destroyed the morals of the world"
Because somewhere in that equation, there will ALWAYS be a person that owns the store or makes the robots or FIXES the robots or owns the farm that the fucking food is grown on.
sc0pl355 3 years ago
"r a ignorant little kid who just wants to argue about stuff on the internet cuz u dont got the nuts to stand up to the people who are really making umad"
First off, I'm not a kid. I'm most likely older than you are.
Secondly, I have NO FUCKING PROBLEM standing up to people who make me upset. ONLINE OR OFF! I don't even know where that shit you said came from.
As far as I'm concerned, you're a typical dumbass Canadian who doesn't understand shit about how the human mind works.
sc0pl355 3 years ago
yeah im a dumb ass because why ? oh right cuz i think it would be cool if we lived in a work free world with out greed and power hungry people.....i never said its gunna happen i said i would be cool ?.ha yeah im a dumbass canadian....thats funny atleast i dont live in a country were 1 in 50 people cant find there country on a map....you live in the dumbest most ignorant country in the world....with a government turning you into a police state.....
TheFelixxRevolution 3 years ago
"oh right cuz i think it would be cool if we lived in a work free world with out greed and power hungry people....."
That's nice to think it is cool...
But it will never happen.
"thats funny atleast i dont live in a country were 1 in 50 people cant find there country on a map...."
Um, Canada is north of mainland US and south of Alaska.
sc0pl355 3 years ago
"yeah im a dumb ass"
That's what I said, you're a dumbass.
"you live in the dumbest most ignorant country in the world...."
No country is dumber or more ignorant than Canada.
"with a government turning you into a police state....."
Hmm, have you ever been to the US?
This is hardly a police state. The Republicans did cause a lot of trouble here, but the Democrats and Obama are going to take this great country back.
sc0pl355 3 years ago
lolz "this great country back" that my friend is what im talking about NO country is great wel all have a flaws but ur a typical american and think nothing is wrong with America.and yes when you cant impeach ur president because its illegal and you have mass arrests is a country on its way to becoming a police state.and give me one example of how Canada is ignorant or dumb ? well accualy buisness owners here are dumb i mean u use our oil use our trees use our power n take our inventions
TheFelixxRevolution 3 years ago
" NO country is great "
So, if something isn't perfect, then it isn't great.
It all makes sense now... You're a Dalek.
" when you cant impeach ur president because its illegal"
Um, we CAN impeach our president. Remember Nixon?
"give me one example of how Canada is ignorant or dumb?"
you think that we can't impeach out government officials...
I mean, dang, they tried to impeach Clinton and Nixon DID get impeached. Seems kinda ignorant to me.
sc0pl355 3 years ago
I would say that if a robot has sentience and emotion it should have rights... Though I'm a neuromimetic construct so my opinion probably doesn't count ^_^
PinkProgram 3 years ago
no they are machines, as long as inorganic they are just fancy chunks of metal. organic is when problems start
dankglassUSA 3 years ago
hell no they are needed as slaves sex includet ;-)......
kingmaxim187 3 years ago 2
They don't require rights.
If they follow program, then why would robots need amendments, they would never use them. The only person to fear or worry about would be the man behind it.
However.... If we gave AI the ability to make 'real' choices, rights may be needed to uphold lawful decisons when a robot fails at a job or kills someone.
E3655 3 years ago
no we made them they live under our rules like they r our "children" we made them
fuflang 3 years ago
I'm not afraid of robots getting smarter. I'm more concerned about humans getting dumber.
ByteBin 3 years ago 10
the only robot i want is my gundam Stryke (n_n)
1x93cm 3 years ago 4
@1x93cm I have to go with the exia from Gundam 00. It's nice to see another gundam fan!
hoptoad123 1 year ago
these robots don't need rights. but eventually the will.
goldencricket 3 years ago
i am scared of robot.
DRcaprice 3 years ago
They're more scared of you than you are of them (^_^)
1x93cm 3 years ago
they can be programed. dont fuck with the a.i.
DRcaprice 3 years ago
Tell us what the background music is? Good stuff...
hilslamer 3 years ago
There'll be a point in history in which AI will be as complex as the human psyche, in this moment when machines are capable of creation and abstract thought they will need rights or they will fight for it.
letsgetthisoverwith 3 years ago
I think robots shouldn't have rights. No matter how much it looks/acts like a human, it's still a machine.
Sethjuh19 3 years ago
no.
darththc 3 years ago
when there is some awareness, then maybe.
sirMAXX77 3 years ago
robots cant have rights because theyre machines theyre tools not people, thats like giving a screwdriver rights
CGantt23 3 years ago
and if you were a robot made fully aware and overheard that wouldnt it anger you if you could feel that emotion?
chronoglideskyway2 3 years ago
Yes, CGantt, giving _today's_ robots rights would be just silly.
Dirtfire 3 years ago
well in many years later gundam will be here lols
acephantom 3 years ago
if we program them right, there will be no problems. irobot was wrong with the "robot spirit"
kittyhassomeclaws 3 years ago
lol at 00:45 teres meta knight
i loooooooooooove artificial life
FourHammers 3 years ago
u guys r nerds!
CAKEFILMS 3 years ago
lol yep Burn!!
IGotRobots 3 years ago
even if we do get overrun by robots then who cares the world will be safe and they are gonna run out of batteries sooner or later
thefridaynight 3 years ago 2
Robots could be programmed to make batteries with renewable energy. In fact if you go to a battery factory, it's already mostly robots making them.
xXAkridXx 3 years ago
No. Robots are not a species, they are mearly the creation of man to make our lives easier. All the stuff that makes them human like, is just a series of cogs and hydraulics working in a manner programmed by humans. Robots will only do what humans tell them to, and nothing more, artificial intelligence is only a wide library of thoughts programmed by humans, and the robot cannont think of anything they are not programmed to think of.
KrazyFreeloader27 3 years ago 2
like life isnt easy as it is, life being hard is what makes life... life. Without LIFE then we become lazy and the human race is no longer the human race. once that happens, they will dispose of the filth (us), try to "make our lives easier".
adood101 3 years ago
lol, cogs and hydraulics huh? Its possible but it would take a lot of effort. And AI is not a huge library of thoughts it is programming algorithms that emulate thought and In some cases can learn
bobobob8531 3 years ago
The human brain can possibly be replicated artificially.
xXAkridXx 3 years ago
in that case it can adquire some rights
Aersus 3 years ago
NO, they don't need rights, if they are smart enough for rights they won't be caled robot's annymore, the therm robot is a direct link to, ... robot, it does what you say becous it cant think
immortigo 3 years ago 2
you mf you suck balls
cayo09 3 years ago
when robots get smart enough, people will realise that robots will need they're own adaptation of human rights.
ntt688 3 years ago
Yo see if you can make the robots actully talk, move, and understand you. And have fellings. And I love some of those robots just wondering how much one of them were. Thanx duman123456789
duman123456789 3 years ago
damnit she dropped the love bomb... quote from the 82nd airborne as a tank division is running from the germans "looking for a safe place? well park behind me cuz this is as far as the bastards are going" so if your scared of skynet, you can hide behind me =)
agnie123 3 years ago
Agnie, you sound just like the kind of black racist everyone hates.
THIRD00EYE00OF00TWO 3 years ago
actually im asain american, so your wrong. im very culturally aware and internationally oriented, so your wrong again.i just harassing geeks getting worked up over stupid shit after a long day at work. it tickles my fucken fancy.
agnie123 3 years ago
agnie123...,lol,,,,do we work together ,, we are already 25 years more advanced than 99.78 percent of the world realizes,This a quote From Robot specialist Noel Sharkey This year 2008 , ; They pose a threat to humanity, said AI scientist Noel Sharkey of the University of Sheffield in England, ahead of a presentation this week to Britain's Royal United Services Institute.February 29 ,2008,Fighting Robots are self Aware I want people to know!!!!,,Best wishes to you and your loved ones, Agnie321
IAmStillRighthere 3 years ago
Hey i have the same kind of video ,,,way too cool,,Subbed,,,Hugs xoxox
JustRobots 3 years ago
shut yo lip you pretentious woman. or are you saying your not a dude but a programer, or a programer woman? anycase, what the hell is a ghost account? the fact is, u sound like a dumbass. fix yourself you 10110.
agnie123 3 years ago
Robots have surpassed all expectations 2 years ago for fucks sake ,wake up ,robots increase their capacity same as a computer ,that means in 25 years it will be much more human that you or me,imagine giving that to corrupt government ,then what ,you people better think ahead, not just a year, but forever,
this is not a game ,China and the British have given robots rights because they understand
doing it now beats us down the road ,idiots you people are idiots.
IAmStillRighthere 4 years ago
you sound like a complete dumbass dude.
agnie123 3 years ago
agnie123,,,i,m not a dude ,,i,m a robot programmer for 11 years ,so i know a thing
or 2,,,nice ghost account,,whats that all about
IAmStillRighthere 3 years ago
IAmStillRighthere,,,your a programmer ,my Dad is a robot specialist
that is so cool and your a girl wow ,,,Hugs xoxoxox ,,please watch some of my robot videos
JustRobots 3 years ago
it is VERY possible for a robot to learn more than it's creator, it can figure things out by using simple logic. just like humans learned math, it would though be impossible for the robot to just paint a picture without being told what to paint. my point is: robots can learn logic things (like humans) but they can't invent new things.
solidacid1337 4 years ago
the robot at 00:15 looks OK... but how can robots know things that we dont??? :S AI hasnt even been developed yet, so the robot only knows what we know, or programmed into it. How can we give them rights if theyre not even a living specie? They'll one day run out of batteries, and we created the robots, not the other way around so this rights thing is a load of bullshit seriously
aidanlaw95 4 years ago
no they do not you realy take it to serios ...... you i'm not going to say it
tigerbry8787 4 years ago
they run out of batterys, we dont, unless you count dieing running out of batteries =/
spartan3065 4 years ago
so smart...yet they run into fucking walls and walk off platforms
AlienZygote010 4 years ago 3
Right...
Andoriyu 4 years ago
Uhhh dude I dont think you've thought this through on the description, how can the thing someone created be smarter than the creator? it cant learn things the creator hasnt because thats quite impossible, e.g how can a robot know how to divide if the creator dosent the creator would have to program it to. so there disagree if you wish but its very logical waht I am saying.
ebrahim23 4 years ago
lol.
Example One Computer:
The creator doesnt know S**t compared to the computer...
Example Two: Calculator:
The creator couldn't tell you 334 to the power of 37 divided by 15.75 instantly
Check out: Shift Happens(In 2048 a $1000 computer will be smarter then the whole human race.
SuperBunnyAndFriends 4 years ago
@ebrahim23
Do you not think it is possible for the creator to upload thousands of programs to the machine without ever learning what those programs do?
Example: He could upload every language in the world into the machine even though the creator himself might only speak one language.
mrmosses 1 year ago
@mrmosses Then the information would be coming from someone else, and they would need to be credited for helping in creating. For example, no humans know what's in the 10th dimension, how could we create a robot to tell us that? without it actually going into the 10th dimension, its impossible. What you were describing is someone using another persons information that they did not personally write, my previous statement still stands.
ebrahim23 1 year ago
Also, about god, your not going to accomplish anything. Your not going to make any advances in your argument. What you will do, metaphorically, is hold your hands against your ears and scream and then, while your screaming you yell, "convince me!!!"
jakehr3 4 years ago
i think an important thing to consider for our scientists about getting into advances into subjects like genetics, robotics, biochemistry, biology, chemistry, and any other type of science or engineering is:
" Your scientists were so busy with wondering if they could, they didn't ask whether they should."
jakehr3 4 years ago
you guys take things way to serios lighten up
dematthew222 4 years ago
how does a robot become more intelligent aside from possibly the science of computers and robotics. A robot is a manmade inorganic creation, It's not even organic. The only way a robot would ever need rights was if it was able to perform the 8 characteristics of a living thing without assistance from human scientists. Animals and plants can do it, so they may need rights however robots cant therefore they are not living things.
gigan36 4 years ago
think about it, the bodys emotions and reactions are nothing but electronical impulses, just look at the nerv system and the brain.
Robots also reacts this way and its NOT science fiction that in the distant future robots will have complex AI (artifical intelligence) i know it sounds far feched but it isnt really. I saw an interesting documentary about it.
smurfaka 4 years ago
Some scientists are also developing robots (still very small ones) that have a form of 'brain', It's build like our brain, but very simplistic. It hasn't got anything programmed, but it reacts on it's environnement.
So theoreticaly, they are making arificial humans in the near future :)
sirtide 4 years ago
you say "built like our brain, but very simplistic"?
That's an oxymoron. Our brains aren't simplistic so they're not like our brains at all.
Dirtfire 3 years ago
I know, but they want to make them like a "real" brain (watch the brackets). Not just a programmed computer in a head. It reacts of its own to its surroundings, and said very, very simplistic, human brains, react to their evironment.
And I know that the brain is very complex, but it's like everything, you have to start at the bottom to reach the peak.
sirtide 3 years ago
well first, god is real. 2, what the hell is up with the teddy bear is he a dot head or something. 3, WTF is up with cat the cd rom player is in his ass??? thats nice, shove a cd up a cats ass.
GaaraandSusakevsDX 4 years ago
ya the horse convinced me
stingeypwn 4 years ago
i think we should stop before it takes a keanu reeves-chuck norris team to stop the robots
fishamburger 4 years ago
I think that robotics is not so much the issue, but rather consciousness. Both humans and by extension animals, have limited rights - this is because we can empathize with them.
I would think that the same would hold true for advanced robots, and all other forms of artificial life no matter where it originates.
neotoy 4 years ago 2
you're so right, no matter what kind of life form once they gain consciousnes they can't be pushed around and have to make their own choices.
SuperFinGuy 4 years ago
A robot gets twice as smart every
18 months ,so if or when its as smart as a human,then in as
little as 25 years it will be over 32,000 times more capable than the best human 18 months later it will be 64,000 times more capable .18 months later it will be 128,000
times more capable or the knowledge of 128,000 people and their profession .
RobotsAreHereNow 4 years ago
The question you are really asking is: When does a creation gain such a status as to demand more from its creator than the creator intended. It is a matter of sovereignty. Does a clay pot have rights over the potter? Does a human have rights over God? Does a robot have to subject itself to the sovereignty of man? These issues are being settled in a much higher court where you may be called as a witness.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago
Agreed.
socceroos123 4 years ago
God does not exist so yeah humans have rights over god.
Dewnis 4 years ago
god doesn't exist? you seem really certain, given the monolithic implications of the subject of a personal god, you shouldn't simply assume it/he/she doesn't exist because it seems a superfluous asumption without the necesary evidence...
having said that, same thing goes for you out there who say "god deffinately exists" no evidence, the only sensible approach if "maybe" or "i don't know"
cool robots btw :D
IzzyBunneh 4 years ago
just because you can't prove something doesn't exist, doesn't mean it DOES exist.
please see "the church of the flying spaggethi monster" for more info (yes im serios)
smurfaka 4 years ago
don't see it as "god doesnt exist, so therefor we can play god" see nature as god instead, and think about if it's right to mess too much with that. Im not saying one way or another, its just something to think about :)
smurfaka 4 years ago
Perhaps Robots cannot prove we exist.
AdminOnDuty 4 years ago 4
@AdminOnDuty
The problem is, humans cannot create consciousness. We possess consciousness ourselves, and we may well soon be able to orient an environment which facilitates the emergence of consciousness similar to how our own emerges... but that does not mean that we created it. No more than we "create" the electricity which shoots out of a tesla coil.
If consciousness is a natural phenomena (which it certainly appears to be), then any consciousness that we "create" will be subject to (cont)
Sinuev1 1 year ago
@Sinuev1
... the same natural rights as we ourselves enjoy. A mother and father "create" a consciousness by reproducing conditions capable of facilitating the emergence of that consciousness (I.E. doing the nasty). But parents while parents are considered custodians and caretakers of this new consciousness they "created", they do not hold absolute sovereignty and power over that child. We have recognized children's rights, so why would strong A.I. be any different?
(Sorry for the 2 year resp)
Sinuev1 1 year ago
@Sinuev1,
You have a very good perception of things ;-). However, unlike energy (electricity) evidence indicates that consciousness can be created and destroyed (birth & death), entered and exited (coma).
So, if we made AI robots that made other robots, we would expect that they would not have sovereignty over each other. But we, as creators of the robots could have sovereignty over them and would need to in order to ensure that a global over-run would not occur at the expense of human life.
AdminOnDuty 1 year ago
@AdminOnDuty
I wouldn't say we "create or destroy" consciousness. Consciousness isn't a thing, and more an effect, - an emergent property of a complex system. Build or destroy the system, and you can start or suppress the effect. Indeed, by identifying and experimenting on specific brain regions known to correlate with conscious perception - we can "carve up consciousness" just as easily as we preform surgery on a body.
However, the argument can be made that the creation of a hammer... (cont)
Sinuev1 1 year ago
@Sinuev1
.. or a song is no different. We're not really creating anything new, but arranging environments to induce a desired resulting effect. So do we owe the hammer rights, or do we treat strong A.I as a tool like a hammer? I say no, we do not owe the hammer rights, as it does not possess any qualia... if it did, then yes, it would deserve rights. Any A.I with human or animal-esque qualia, should then be considered of human or animal in regards to rights - though perhaps tailored to it.
Sinuev1 1 year ago
@Sinuev1
On your second point, I do not believe that keeping the leash tight on our creation would be for the better good. Strong A.I. might not even recognize with much more interest as we recognize other apes as being a threat or companion. But if they are built using our brains as a template, and they are comparable to us in qualia, then our best course of action would be to recognize this early on and integrate them into society as equals - as humans - with vested interest in prosperity.
Sinuev1 1 year ago
@Sinuev1 (Final post, sorry for being long)
As we integrate more with machines, and as they integrate more with society and human interface - I honestly see convergence as a more likely scenario. Though perhaps there will be a further stratification, or a reorientation, of social classes and emergent new cultures.
If by some crazy chance they did kill us all, then at least we will have left an indelible mark legacy as the catalyst for the silicate version of the Cambrian explosion.
Sinuev1 1 year ago
@Sinuev1 If a more powerful A.I. were created; one with the capacity for human-like brain activity, wouldn't you think that the creators would integrate something like the zeroth law of robitics into the A.I. to prevent any unwanted effects?
Gurgleschlortz 3 months ago
@Gurgleschlortz
Well, do you believe we should apply similar control measures in genetically/cybernetically enhanced humans? What potential dangers and societal repercussions will we face as the gap in abilities between plus and stock grow ever wider? Should we who would pursue augmentation feel ok about being forced to integrate overt behavioral overrides in order to placate the fears of those who remain stock
Yet if AI is modeled on our minds, with analogous Qualia, isn't it just as immoral
Sinuev1 3 months ago
@Sinuev1 Let's throw mechanical augmentation out the door for now. What about biological augmentation? Has nobody given any thought to what simple cells could do if we put them to use the correct way? And since most cells can reproduce, it would be fairly cheap. And the best part is that these augmentations would be fairly 'natural', reducing the fears of people around them.
Gurgleschlortz 3 months ago
@Gurgleschlortz
Well honestly I think you'd have an easier time getting people to accept cybernetics. Most people are already accustomed to, and support, the development of prosthesis and technology. Hell, some folk are already so reliant into their cellphones that not having it would be as frustrating as losing a hand
Biological augmentation is more likely to draw irrational fear and outrage due to the looming specter of eugenics and the development of weapons-grade pathogens last century
Sinuev1 3 months ago
@Sinuev1 True, very true. But let me get back to the point, I seem to have gone astray from the topic. When robots reach the point where they are intelligent enough to require rights, they stop being robots all together. So the video's title is about the same as "DO CHAIRS NEED RIGHTS YOU TELL US".
Gurgleschlortz 3 months ago
a robot will never be more or less then then what it is.
we choose to make them the way they are.
Jabmechtech 4 years ago
I think they need togive rights to the beer pouring robot. He would be useful to have around and is probably harmless.
numinousforce 4 years ago
If only Mr, Asimov was still around to help with this dilemma.
NaturalTwentyFilms 4 years ago
schmiggen no its not, china has 1800 university's since last year working the kinks out ,plus 10 of the biggest robot company's are under the one roof for a whole year thats quite
a move for the government to do, nothing like this ever ,the man in charge said if he gets his way the whole planet can have a robot by 2010, not me. in their homes .robots are here ,its still a free for all right now,, but china said soon ,they are not know for bluffing.
RobotsAreHereNow 4 years ago
Why would robots need rights?
Why would telephones need rights?
Why would cereal need rights?
If you've got sentient AI in a robot, I'd like to know about it. But for now, I don't think that question applies to robots :P
schmiggen 4 years ago
schmiggen
sorry but that is old stuff AI is internet servers feeding robots japan is using them every where so you need to read up
RobotsAreHereNow 4 years ago
I said sentient AI :P. That's quite a bit different.
schmiggen 4 years ago