122 réponses à ce sujet

[wulf3n]

Ramirez Wolfen wrote...
The parent knows that the kid is going to be sentient, not a robot. Also, we are not talking about LIVING things, we are talking about machines made from inanimate objects (metals, and such)

Why is a sentient made of dividing cells, have more right to live than a sentient made of non-dividing cells?

Argue all you want about can machines really be sentient in RL, but in ME the geth ARE sentient, thats not in question.

[Eradyn]

A robot is merely a tool that can be taken up and used, at any moment, and set down and left without another thought, from the user or from the tool itself. The moment a robot begins contemplating its fate, it gains sapience and is therefore a "living entity," though not organic.

Modifié par Eradyn, 05 février 2011 - 07:02 .

[V-rex]

If my computer became sentient to the point where it was asking me 'Do I have a soul?' Then I would no longer consider it to be 'just a machine'. Because it can think, it can wonder and it can ponder and is now aware of its own existence and what it means to be 'living'.

It would be a living, sentient self aware creature that I wouldn't have any right to destroy. Regardless of what it started out as, it's so much more now. And I don't think I would be able to consider myself it's 'owner' anymore, nor would I consider myself it's 'creator'. Once it can start thinking for itself independant of me, then I no longer 'have the right' to destroy it.

I would not be shutting down a computer, I would be destroying a life. One that has become aware and awakened for the first time and has just started to glimpse what it means to be alive. Maybe even what it means to be human.
I don't have the right to kill it, especially not just for my own convienience.

Not to mention there is that 'other' aspect to mention. Namely if this intelligence is in my computer, and my computer is connected to the internet... what's stopping the intelligence from escaping into the internet? Again this might not be so bad if it has no reason to fear me or humans in general but if I had tried to shut down or kill my computer's intelligence then I would have just given a newly formed sentient intelligence a very good reason to fear me and consider me a threat to its existence.
And if it gained a sudden fear for me and was able to gain access to the global network known as the internet... well then what's stopping it from fighting back? Taking control of weapons systems and automatically launching nuclear missles? Scrambling communications across the planet? Creating an army of T-800's to finish us off?

I mean if literally the very first thing a newly formed life form that has the potential to be immeasurably powerful learns is that humans will hate and fear it and try to destroy it, why wouldn't it try to fight back?

And do you know what? When we are all toiling in the coal mines under the watchful eye of our photon laser equipped mechanical overlords, desperatley mining the rest of the Earth's minerals to be made into new microchips and having the bodies of our dead made into electric proteign paste for the pleasures of Skynet. My thoughts on the matter will be:
"You know what? We had this coming."

Truth be told, I actually don't think a human body differs all that much from a machine. It has various aspects to it that all do a different task to keep the 'main mechanism' functioning (heart, lungs stomach). It requires fuel (food, water) to stay active. It needs to power down and power up (sleep), eventually it will start to wear down (age) until finally it expires (death).

The way I see it, a perfect organism functions like a perfect machine anyway. So if we were able to create perfect synthetic versions of said organism then the only thing that would really seperate us from the machines in terms of function would be higher brain power.
Which if they evolved the capacity for thought... and emotion, then they would be considered 'alive'. At least in my eyes.

So yeah, if my computer talked to me. I'd talk back, show it respect. Not give it a reason to want to kill me, nor would I think I had the right to kill it.

Modifié par V-rex, 05 février 2011 - 07:02 .

[volus4life]

James2912 wrote...

Who gives the this "right to live" certainly not nature. So I think you people are imposing your morality and religious viewpoints on others. Most people myself included do not consider nonbiological entities to be alive. The geth are computers that were developed in order to help the Quarians they failed in this purpose so they were "recalled."

our computers never tell us they wish to remain operational. they lack the sentience to do so. so we shut them down whenever.

if our computers started wishing to remain operational and telling us that their current memories make them who they are, then that's a different story.

Ramirez Wolfen wrote...

but if you created it, don't you have the right to destroy it?

theroetically, so miranda's dad is perfectly justified if he wants to  kill miranda? or any of her sisters?

[James2912]

[quote]James2912 wrote...

[quote]wulf3n wrote...

[quote]Ramirez Wolfen wrote...
having kids has nothing to do with this except have one be more biased to one side.[/quote]

Kids are the creation of their parent, by your logic parents have the right to destroy their own kids.

[quote]James2912 wrote...
Who gives the this "right to live" certainly not nature. So I think you people are imposing your morality and religious viewpoints on others. Most people myself included do not consider nonbiological entities to be alive. The geth are computers that were developed in order to help the Quarians they failed in this purpose so they were "recalled."[/quote]

What if i don't consider you alive? for all i know your just a physical manifestation of my subconscious. You don't think, you don't breathe, or eat, i just think you do, does that mean i have the right to kill you?
[/quote]



And by the way the what if I don't consider you to be a live argumennt was the most childish and worse argument I have ever seen in my life. I literally lol. 

Modifié par James2912, 05 février 2011 - 07:05 .

[Ramirez Wolfen]

wulf3n wrote...

Ramirez Wolfen wrote...
The parent knows that the kid is going to be sentient, not a robot. Also, we are not talking about LIVING things, we are talking about machines made from inanimate objects (metals, and such)

Why is a sentient made of dividing cells, have more right to live than a sentient made of non-dividing cells?

Argue all you want about can machines really be sentient in RL, but in ME the geth ARE sentient, thats not in question.

We all know the Geth ARE sentient. But the Geth becoming sentient was a mistake by the Quarians, who are the Geth's creators.

[wulf3n]

James2912 wrote...
Assuming you were actually able to kill me (highly unlikely because I have a concealed carry licence you would go to jail because the vast majority of countries probably yours included have made murder of a human being. However if you were to miss and destroy my computer you would just have to pay for the damages.

Wow, you completely missed the point. Im not saying that i WOULD kill you, im saying do i have the right to kill you if i don't believe you exist? You say "hey your just destroying a computer" but if that computer says it doesn't want to be destroyed why does it not share the same rights as you? from my perspective you're both the same, i can't be certain either of you is "alive"

James2912 wrote...
And by the way the what if I don't consider you to be a live argumennt was the most childish and worse argument I have ever seen in my life. I literally lol. 

But how can i "know" you're alive? i can't know what you're thinking. Just as you can't know I'm alive. The same goes for anything that is claiming sentience. When AI gets to a certain point we won't know if it truly is sentient, or if its just imitating. But then how can you justify killing it, when you make killing other sentient beings wrong?

Modifié par wulf3n, 05 février 2011 - 07:12 .

[Ramirez Wolfen]

Eradyn wrote...

A robot is merely a tool that can be taken up and used, at any moment, and set down and left without another thought, from the user or from the tool itself. The moment a robot begins contemplating its fate, it gains sapience and is therefore a "living entity," though not organic.

Either way, shouldn't the Quarians have rights to the Geth, considering that they are the Geth's creators?

[wulf3n]

Ramirez Wolfen wrote...
We all know the Geth ARE sentient. But the Geth becoming sentient was a mistake by the Quarians, who are the Geth's creators.

But why does the intention of the quarians matter? say a child was a mistake, the parents forgot to put on a condom, would the parents then have the right to kill the child? they didn't want to create a sentient being just like the quarians, it just happened.

[Ramirez Wolfen]

wulf3n wrote...

Ramirez Wolfen wrote...
We all know the Geth ARE sentient. But the Geth becoming sentient was a mistake by the Quarians, who are the Geth's creators.

But why does the intention of the quarians matter? say a child was a mistake, the parents forgot to put on a condom, would the parents then have the right to kill the child? they didn't want to create a sentient being just like the quarians, it just happened.

1) Ever heard of abortion? (that isn't to say I believe in it)

2) So people aren't allowed to fix their mistakes?

[volus4life]

no, the quarians don't have the "right" to kill a sentient being just because they created one. see miranda's dad versus miranda and sisters.

[Eradyn]

Ramirez Wolfen wrote...

Eradyn wrote...

A robot is merely a tool that can be taken up and used, at any moment, and set down and left without another thought, from the user or from the tool itself. The moment a robot begins contemplating its fate, it gains sapience and is therefore a "living entity," though not organic.

Either way, shouldn't the Quarians have rights to the Geth, considering that they are the Geth's creators?

No.  They can try to enslave the Geth, but the Geth have already achieved sapience and can therefore exert their own basic, inherent "rights" as any other living creature could: for example, to resist to survive.  The quarians could try and create a "new geth" that would not operate as the originals did but would serve a similar purpose as the geth did when they were merely tools and not sapient.

I prefer the idea where the quarians and geth reach a "consensus" and compromise, working together toward mutual survival.  Or at least leave each other the hell alone if they can't play nice like grown ups.

[James2912]

Once again I want to ask who gives these rights to live? Answer is noone! its kill or be killed baby! And if you believe God does then your just pushing your religious beliefs on others!

[volus4life]

James2912 wrote...

Once again I want to ask who gives these rights to live? Answer is noone! its kill or be killed baby! And if you believe God does then your just pushing your religious beliefs on others!

well, that is true. in the end, it really is a case of "might makes right".

in the end, if the reapers kill all of us, it doesn't matter if their cleansing is immoral or genocidal. it just is.

Modifié par volus4life, 05 février 2011 - 07:14 .

[STG]

René Descartes - "I think therefore I am."

[quote]Katamariguy wrote...

[quote]STG wrote...

[quote]Ramirez Wolfen wrote...

but if you created it, don't you have the right to destroy it?

[/quote]

Do you have kids?[/quote]

Abortion?

[/quote]
[/quote]

Indeed. But I don't think discussing that here would be allowed.

Modifié par STG, 05 février 2011 - 07:15 .

[Eradyn]

James2912 wrote...

Once again I want to ask who gives these rights to live? Answer is noone! its kill or be killed baby! And if you believe God does then your just pushing your religious beliefs on others!

You realize the whole point of "kill or be killed" is survival, or "to live," right?

[wulf3n]

James2912 wrote...

Once again I want to ask who gives these rights to live? Answer is noone! its kill or be killed baby! And if you believe God does then your just pushing your religious beliefs on others!

Yet you believe the government do!

James2912 wrote...
 you would go to jail because the vast majority of countries probably yours included have made murder of a human being.

[Ramirez Wolfen]

volus4life wrote...

no, the quarians don't have the "right" to kill a sentient being just because they created one. see miranda's dad versus miranda and sisters.

That depends on your viewpoint.

[Ramirez Wolfen]

Eradyn wrote...

Ramirez Wolfen wrote...

Eradyn wrote...

A robot is merely a tool that can be taken up and used, at any moment, and set down and left without another thought, from the user or from the tool itself. The moment a robot begins contemplating its fate, it gains sapience and is therefore a "living entity," though not organic.

Either way, shouldn't the Quarians have rights to the Geth, considering that they are the Geth's creators?

No.  They can try to enslave the Geth, but the Geth have already achieved sapience and can therefore exert their own basic, inherent "rights" as any other living creature could: for example, to resist to survive.  The quarians could try and create a "new geth" that would not operate as the originals did but would serve a similar purpose as the geth did when they were merely tools and not sapient.

I prefer the idea where the quarians and geth reach a "consensus" and compromise, working together toward mutual survival.  Or at least leave each other the hell alone if they can't play nice like grown ups.

That depends on your viewpoint. Also, sapience doesn't grant autonomy from the creator. Where does it say otherwise?

[wulf3n]

Ramirez Wolfen wrote...
1) Ever heard of abortion? (that isn't to say I believe in it)

abortion is an "interesting" topic for lack of a better word, as a lot of debate revolves around when is a fetus truly sentient. But im talking more about killing a child, one that is able to talk and knows the difference between life and death.

Ramirez Wolfen wrote...
2) So people aren't allowed to fix their mistakes?

By infringing on the rights of others, no.

[James2912]

Thats artificial we all agree to give up our sovereignty to our government so that order can be established rather than the anarchy of the jungle. The government doesn't give rights because it has no rights to give. It is simply an attempt sometimes futile to impose order on chaos. A lot of times it doesn't work and a lot of times people break the "law" and so they suffer the consequences. Laws are like mass treaties that we all agree to follow for our own benefit, once it no longer benefits them to follow the law many people choose to break them. 

Modifié par James2912, 05 février 2011 - 07:21 .

[Eradyn]

Ramirez Wolfen wrote...

That depends on your viewpoint. Also, sapience doesn't grant autonomy from the creator. Where does it say otherwise?

You are either an entity or you are not.  You are either a tool without any thought or will or sense of self or any degree of awareness, or you are.  This isn't about viewpoint.  Once you have sapience, you are by inherent virtue of that sapience possessing autonomy.

[Ramirez Wolfen]

wulf3n wrote...

Ramirez Wolfen wrote...
1) Ever heard of abortion? (that isn't to say I believe in it)

abortion is an "interesting" topic for lack of a better word, as a lot of debate revolves around when is a fetus truly sentient. But im talking more about killing a child, one that is able to talk and knows the difference between life and death.

Ramirez Wolfen wrote...
2) So people aren't allowed to fix their mistakes?

By infringing on the rights of others, no.

What gives the Geth, the Quarians' creation, rights? They are machines which have mistakenly acquired sapience.

[Ramirez Wolfen]

Eradyn wrote...

Ramirez Wolfen wrote...

That depends on your viewpoint. Also, sapience doesn't grant autonomy from the creator. Where does it say otherwise?

You are either an entity or you are not.  You are either a tool without any thought or will or sense of self or any degree of awareness, or you are.  This isn't about viewpoint.  Once you have sapience, you are by inherent virtue of that sapience possessing autonomy.

Once again, Where is that written?

[Aggie Punbot]

James2912 wrote...

 Lets say as your reading this on your and the computer started asking "What is my purpose?" Wouldn't you wipe your hard drive, I mean it would get real annoying if you wanted to play ME2 and all the computer wanted to do was talk about the purpose of life. Same thing with your vacuum, toaster so on and so forth. Then lets say that computer went terminator on your ass and killed all but 16 million people on Earth and kicked you off your own planet! Wouldn't you be p i s s e d! Cuz I would! And then you find aliens in space who treat you like a second class citizen, and then critisize you for trying to reboot your computer! that would make me super p i s s e d!

What you're describing is not what happened between the quarians and the geth. To use your analogy, this is how it happened:
- Computers gain sentience.
- Computer asks what its purpose is.
- You immediately (immediately) take actions to try to destroy all computers on earth. Not "reboot" them, destroy them.
- Computers understand the concept of extermination and take necessary steps to prevent it.

The key point here is that the first one to make the aggressive move was you (i.e. the quarians). The computer (i.e. the geth) had done absolutely nothing to suggest that they intended any harm to anyone other than to inquire about their purpose. The quarians are in the wrong for immediately jumping to genocide as an option before even bothering to reason with them.

The quarians were also in the wrong when they deliberately skirted around the laws surrounding the creation of AIs in the first place ("It wasn't AI research, not really...")

Modifié par TS2Aggie, 05 février 2011 - 07:26 .