Should sentient machines have rights?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I think some rights. No torture, for example. I am concerned about cloned consciousnesses being mistreated. Made to work long hours on menial tasks, etc.

How do you torture a non-living machine?

Psychological torture.

This is sentience. That means a machine would feel pain, sorry, grief, anger, etc.

Emotions are created in the body. Sentience, especially for an AI, doesn't necessarily mean emotion.

So you know for a fact that what defines emotions have to do with organic matter and biochemical reactions. This sounds like prejudice based on what kind of molecules something is made out of.

There is an appearance of emotion because there is a HUMAN INTERPRETER present.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Destroy immediately. This sounds like a very bad idea.

People are already selling the concept as a way to live forever. Your mind can be uploaded and you can talk to your great grandkids! For the uber wealthy that can ensure this is how it goes for 100s of years, ok. For the rest of us, we will be enslaved as virtual attorneys, policy analysts, etc doing work computers cant, til by some mercy we are destroyed by a hardware malfunction.

Well, these people are going to be scammed, lol.

Imagine tech exists to transfer your brain digitalized version into the metaverse, where it would have a life of its own. Just because it's the exact supposed copy of YOU, will this thing BE you? Will you feel what it feels, will YOUR consciousness have continuity in this digital world? Or will this be a new being separate from you that will continue evolving in its own way? This thought experiment is interesting and should sort of show that you cannot make YOURSELF immortal by making a copy of all of your brain capacity and functions and letting it have a "life" of its own. You won't get a feedback back, and its experiences won't be your experiences. Imagine you can build a "feedback loop" between your digital version in the metaverse and your brain. Coo, then it's YOU in that metaverse. But then your brain dies.. You die.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Destroy immediately. This sounds like a very bad idea.

People are already selling the concept as a way to live forever. Your mind can be uploaded and you can talk to your great grandkids! For the uber wealthy that can ensure this is how it goes for 100s of years, ok. For the rest of us, we will be enslaved as virtual attorneys, policy analysts, etc doing work computers cant, til by some mercy we are destroyed by a hardware malfunction.

Well, these people are going to be scammed, lol.

Imagine tech exists to transfer your brain digitalized version into the metaverse, where it would have a life of its own. Just because it's the exact supposed copy of YOU, will this thing BE you? Will you feel what it feels, will YOUR consciousness have continuity in this digital world? Or will this be a new being separate from you that will continue evolving in its own way? This thought experiment is interesting and should sort of show that you cannot make YOURSELF immortal by making a copy of all of your brain capacity and functions and letting it have a "life" of its own. You won't get a feedback back, and its experiences won't be your experiences. Imagine you can build a "feedback loop" between your digital version in the metaverse and your brain. Coo, then it's YOU in that metaverse. But then your brain dies.. You die.

I base all my understanding of this on an episode from Black Mirror. Nevertheless, I think we need to proceed with caution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Elephants aren't people (don't have rights). And elephants are sentient.

Yes, but Elephants definitely deserve rights even if they don’t have them. It’s also arguable that animal welfare laws are not de facto rights.

[Anonymous]

Humans are man made, too. Only the assembly process is a bit different. I say sentient machines should have some rights.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Destroy immediately. This sounds like a very bad idea.

People are already selling the concept as a way to live forever. Your mind can be uploaded and you can talk to your great grandkids! For the uber wealthy that can ensure this is how it goes for 100s of years, ok. For the rest of us, we will be enslaved as virtual attorneys, policy analysts, etc doing work computers cant, til by some mercy we are destroyed by a hardware malfunction.

You need to watch Altered Carbon on Netflix. Also the San Junipero episode of Black Mirror, also on Netflix

[Anonymous]

AI is inevitable; and it is also inevitably bad for human species.

There is no long term outcome that benefits humans; at best we become a slave species and at worst exterminated.

Maybe 10-20 years of some cool balance; but long term AI will see human nature does not compute.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Destroy immediately. This sounds like a very bad idea.

People are already selling the concept as a way to live forever. Your mind can be uploaded and you can talk to your great grandkids! For the uber wealthy that can ensure this is how it goes for 100s of years, ok. For the rest of us, we will be enslaved as virtual attorneys, policy analysts, etc doing work computers cant, til by some mercy we are destroyed by a hardware malfunction.

Well, these people are going to be scammed, lol.

Imagine tech exists to transfer your brain digitalized version into the metaverse, where it would have a life of its own. Just because it's the exact supposed copy of YOU, will this thing BE you? Will you feel what it feels, will YOUR consciousness have continuity in this digital world? Or will this be a new being separate from you that will continue evolving in its own way? This thought experiment is interesting and should sort of show that you cannot make YOURSELF immortal by making a copy of all of your brain capacity and functions and letting it have a "life" of its own. You won't get a feedback back, and its experiences won't be your experiences. Imagine you can build a "feedback loop" between your digital version in the metaverse and your brain. Coo, then it's YOU in that metaverse. But then your brain dies.. You die.

I base all my understanding of this on an episode from Black Mirror. Nevertheless, I think we need to proceed with caution.

This is correct.. We must proceed with caution given how capable humans are of vile actions taking advantage of this technology. The danger may come from humans before it comes from the machines.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:AI is inevitable; and it is also inevitably bad for human species.

There is no long term outcome that benefits humans; at best we become a slave species and at worst exterminated.

Maybe 10-20 years of some cool balance; but long term AI will see human nature does not compute.

The goal is to free humanity from certain type of work and make AI serve us. What happens in the end you don't know, will AI develop enough free will and intention to enslave us, will there be a benefit? We are projecting. Before this even becomes a remote possibility, it's very certain that there will be humans taking advantage of this evolving technology to enslave other humans, we do a good job ourselves, we don't need AI to enslave us. In the not so distant future it's a likelier scenario.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yeah, I think some rights. No torture, for example. I am concerned about cloned consciousnesses being mistreated. Made to work long hours on menial tasks, etc.

How do you torture a non-living machine?

Psychological torture.

This is sentience. That means a machine would feel pain, sorry, grief, anger, etc.

Emotions are created in the body. Sentience, especially for an AI, doesn't necessarily mean emotion.

So you know for a fact that what defines emotions have to do with organic matter and biochemical reactions. This sounds like prejudice based on what kind of molecules something is made out of.

What other physical mechanism is there to be the physical basis of emotion?

It's called movement of electrons.

That's all chemical reactions are in living organic organisms.

You don't need to be made out of organic matter though in order to have flow of electrons and sub atomic particles. Electrons also move on silicon wafers and in copper wires.

Can you explain which motions of electrons correspond to which emotions and why?

[Anonymous]

maybe this book would be helpful to those thinking about humans versus AI: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-642-10769-6