406 réponses à ce sujet

[chuckles471]

dreman9999 wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

I just do the maths. 2 things in a room, use 1 claw hammer subtraction to equal 1.

EDI vs normal human = claw hammer in the tin can.

EDI vs normal Alien(e.g. Krogan) = circuit board hanging out of someones head.

EDI vs self destructive drug addict = Sorry EDI but he is human. You understand (she probably would).

EDI vs dog = OK you win but if it was my dog... you would get the blunt end.


Yes, she is self aware but she wouldn't be high on the list of people to save.

That is the most helarious bad reason why not to try and save EDI.

Well make a list youself, I was just being honest.  You would pick EDI over a normal human? 

[SeptimusMagistos]

chuckles471 wrote...

I just do the maths. 2 things in a room, use 1 claw hammer subtraction to equal 1.

EDI vs normal human = claw hammer in the tin can.

EDI vs normal Alien(e.g. Krogan) = circuit board hanging out of someones head.

EDI vs self destructive drug addict = Sorry EDI but he is human. You understand (she probably would).

EDI vs dog = OK you win but if it was my dog... you would get the blunt end.


Yes, she is self aware but she wouldn't be high on the list of people to save.

You're making the Catalyst right, you know. Are you proud of that?

chuckles471 wrote...

Well make a list youself, I was just being honest.  You would pick EDI over a normal human? 

Depends on who the human is, of course. But both would get equal consideration.

Modifié par SeptimusMagistos, 05 septembre 2012 - 04:21 .

[Endorlf]

chuckles471 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

I just do the maths. 2 things in a room, use 1 claw hammer subtraction to equal 1.

EDI vs normal human = claw hammer in the tin can.

EDI vs normal Alien(e.g. Krogan) = circuit board hanging out of someones head.

EDI vs self destructive drug addict = Sorry EDI but he is human. You understand (she probably would).

EDI vs dog = OK you win but if it was my dog... you would get the blunt end.


Yes, she is self aware but she wouldn't be high on the list of people to save.

That is the most helarious bad reason why not to try and save EDI.

Well make a list youself, I was just being honest.  You would pick EDI over a normal human? 

Would you pick a normal Turian over a normal human?

[chuckles471]

Wayning_Star wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

I just do the maths. 2 things in a room, use 1 claw hammer subtraction to equal 1.

EDI vs normal human = claw hammer in the tin can.

EDI vs normal Alien(e.g. Krogan) = circuit board hanging out of someones head.

EDI vs self destructive drug addict = Sorry EDI but he is human. You understand (she probably would).

EDI vs dog = OK you win but if it was my dog... you would get the blunt end.


Yes, she is self aware but she wouldn't be high on the list of people to save.

you said "She".. uhoh, someone call a ,we got neglegence over here..lol

I didn't give her labia, boobs and a female voice.

[Iconoclaste]

The simple fact is that we know so little actually about "thought", "feelings" and their associated mechanics that it renders the whole point a bit superficial.

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 05 septembre 2012 - 04:23 .

[DirtyPhoenix]

KBomb wrote...

You got me then. I guess people who suffer amnesia aren’t really alive. I guess when discussing neurophilosophy, one must narrow it down to—You are your memories!
 
 
Now, this discussion has been lovely, but I am off to email those thousands of people a year who suffer from amnesia and ask them if anyone has sent them the Picard youtube link or bought them a copy of Assassin’s Creed.   

:lol: This reminds me of another similar case. When Shepard is brought back to life in the beginning of ME2, how sure are you that it is the same person, and not a VI that considers him/herself Shepard? SHepard himself speculates on this (lol) at Cronos station.

[chuckles471]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

I just do the maths. 2 things in a room, use 1 claw hammer subtraction to equal 1.

EDI vs normal human = claw hammer in the tin can.

EDI vs normal Alien(e.g. Krogan) = circuit board hanging out of someones head.

EDI vs self destructive drug addict = Sorry EDI but he is human. You understand (she probably would).

EDI vs dog = OK you win but if it was my dog... you would get the blunt end.


Yes, she is self aware but she wouldn't be high on the list of people to save.

You're making the Catalyst right, you know. Are you proud of that?

chuckles471 wrote...

Well make a list youself, I was just being honest.  You would pick EDI over a normal human? 

Depends on who the human is, of course. But both would get equal consideration.

When did I say, I'd care about people making A.I so stop exaggerating...  You might fall off your high horse.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

Synthetics quite clearly do have emotional capacity. They even have the ability to alter their emotions, which organics lack.

I actually never said they didn't, I said they lack genuine and complex emotions.

The emotions they are capable of are rudimentary at best.

They don't understand those emotions either. Legion's "no data available" says it all. We as organics understand what it means, but what good is his ability to display admiration if he doesn't even understand what it is?

The premise of "altering" their emotions just further proves it. You draw emotions from what you experience and how you genuinely react to it, not how you program yourself to react to something. That's the difference between human and robot.

The geth have a culture of their own, at least to the same extent that the rachni do.

No they don't. The have no art or culture whatsoever.

They are little different from the Collectors, their tech is almost bug-like, only more metallic. Look at a geth fighter/dropship and tell me it doesn't look like an insect. Look at Geth Plasma SMG and tell me it doesn't look like a gnat.

As for uniqueness - EDI is different from the geth who are different from the Citadel AI.

Those differences are superficial at best, limited to things like physical appearance/voice. Doesn't change the other things they all lack.

But of course none of that matters since sapience and sentience are the only considerations one need make.

Disagreed. And here's why....

Again - I acknowledge that synthetics are quite different from organics. But as intelligent creatures they still deserve all the same rights.

Being "human" means much more than having intelligence. A computer is intelligent, possibly even more than you or me. That doesn't make it deserve more rights. A synthetic is just a self-aware (sentient) computer.

If dogs acquired sentience I would hope they'd be given all the same rights humans are.

... dogs are sentient.

[DirtyPhoenix]

This one of the few productive discussions here on BSN. please continue

[SeptimusMagistos]

chuckles471 wrote...

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

I just do the maths. 2 things in a room, use 1 claw hammer subtraction to equal 1.

EDI vs normal human = claw hammer in the tin can.

EDI vs normal Alien(e.g. Krogan) = circuit board hanging out of someones head.

EDI vs self destructive drug addict = Sorry EDI but he is human. You understand (she probably would).

EDI vs dog = OK you win but if it was my dog... you would get the blunt end.


Yes, she is self aware but she wouldn't be high on the list of people to save.

You're making the Catalyst right, you know. Are you proud of that?

chuckles471 wrote...

Well make a list youself, I was just being honest.  You would pick EDI over a normal human? 

Depends on who the human is, of course. But both would get equal consideration.

When did I say, I'd care about people making A.I so stop exaggerating...  You might fall off your high horse.

Each time you claim that the life of a synthetic is worth less than that of an organic you're widening the organic-synthetic divide and helping to fan the flames of a potential war.

What happens when one day synthetics decide they're sick of an organic being the one who holds the hammer? What if they want a whack at deciding who lives and who dies?

[The Twilight God]

Endorlf wrote...

I'm seeing some people here claiming that EDI was never alive. Just to see what people's opinions are, I created a poll. Do you think EDI is alive? Why or why not? And to follow that up, do you consider her a tool or a person?

Do you consider EDI to be alive?
Do you consider EDI a tool or a person?

Atoms are atoms. They are not sentient. No matter how much lifeless stuff is piled together it will still be lifeless. A pile of metal with delsuions of grandeur is just as much alive a pile a meat with delusions of grandeur. It's that substance which perceived that matters. And both organics and synthetics in the ME universe perceive reality.

So, yes, EDI (like Joker) is alive. Fact.

[chuckles471]

Endorlf wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

I just do the maths. 2 things in a room, use 1 claw hammer subtraction to equal 1.

EDI vs normal human = claw hammer in the tin can.

EDI vs normal Alien(e.g. Krogan) = circuit board hanging out of someones head.

EDI vs self destructive drug addict = Sorry EDI but he is human. You understand (she probably would).

EDI vs dog = OK you win but if it was my dog... you would get the blunt end.


Yes, she is self aware but she wouldn't be high on the list of people to save.

That is the most helarious bad reason why not to try and save EDI.

Well make a list youself, I was just being honest.  You would pick EDI over a normal human? 

Would you pick a normal Turian over a normal human?

I would pick the human.  I am just being honest.

[SeptimusMagistos]

HYR 2.0 wrote...


Being "human" means much more than having intelligence. A computer is intelligent, possibly even more than you or me. That doesn't make it deserve more rights. A synthetic is just a self-aware (sentient) computer.

Okay, I get the difference of opinion.

As far as I'm concerned the kind of self-awareness displayed by humans and AIs (but not animals) is the sole prerequisite for rights.

All the other stuff is frankly superficial enough I don't care to argue about it.

[dreman9999]

chuckles471 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

I just do the maths. 2 things in a room, use 1 claw hammer subtraction to equal 1.

EDI vs normal human = claw hammer in the tin can.

EDI vs normal Alien(e.g. Krogan) = circuit board hanging out of someones head.

EDI vs self destructive drug addict = Sorry EDI but he is human. You understand (she probably would).

EDI vs dog = OK you win but if it was my dog... you would get the blunt end.


Yes, she is self aware but she wouldn't be high on the list of people to save.

That is the most helarious bad reason why not to try and save EDI.

Well make a list youself, I was just being honest.  You would pick EDI over a normal human? 

EDI and a normal human =equal.

I would not pick one over the other unless it gets to the most extremes...The it would come to the issue of most useful.

[chuckles471]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

I just do the maths. 2 things in a room, use 1 claw hammer subtraction to equal 1.

EDI vs normal human = claw hammer in the tin can.

EDI vs normal Alien(e.g. Krogan) = circuit board hanging out of someones head.

EDI vs self destructive drug addict = Sorry EDI but he is human. You understand (she probably would).

EDI vs dog = OK you win but if it was my dog... you would get the blunt end.


Yes, she is self aware but she wouldn't be high on the list of people to save.

You're making the Catalyst right, you know. Are you proud of that?

chuckles471 wrote...

Well make a list youself, I was just being honest.  You would pick EDI over a normal human? 

Depends on who the human is, of course. But both would get equal consideration.

When did I say, I'd care about people making A.I so stop exaggerating...  You might fall off your high horse.

Each time you claim that the life of a synthetic is worth less than that of an organic you're widening the organic-synthetic divide and helping to fan the flames of a potential war.

What happens when one day synthetics decide they're sick of an organic being the one who holds the hammer? What if they want a whack at deciding who lives and who dies?

Your trying to be profound...  O.K.
We have a war and hopefully we kick their heads in.  It really is that simple, we are different from them.

[SeptimusMagistos]

chuckles471 wrote...

Your trying to be profound...  O.K.
We have a war and hopefully we kick their heads in.  It really is that simple, we are different from them.

1: People who are different from you have same value as you.

2: So the Catalyst is right, then? War between synthetics and organics is inevitable?

[Iconoclaste]

In fact, "property" has right, and while someone bashing his belongings to pieces will not get thrown to jail for it, he still risks a holiday in a psychiatric facility. Animals already have rights, and are protected against cruelty and neglect, among other things. We can't really give the "living" adjective to something merely "animated" that will not be guided by the same impulses as the "living". While I can understand the "attractiveness" of a sexy, walking and "wondering" computer, it's still pre-determined behavior and easily "biased" emotions. Funny thing is that the "values" of a machine will not falther before adversity : it will remain "loyal" and sacrifice itself to "defend its loved ones", where the living might just "run for their lives". That makes a funny distinction between "organics" and "synthetics" : the living have obvious "defects" and will easily be defined by their ability to act against reason...

[dreman9999]

chuckles471 wrote...

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

I just do the maths. 2 things in a room, use 1 claw hammer subtraction to equal 1.

EDI vs normal human = claw hammer in the tin can.

EDI vs normal Alien(e.g. Krogan) = circuit board hanging out of someones head.

EDI vs self destructive drug addict = Sorry EDI but he is human. You understand (she probably would).

EDI vs dog = OK you win but if it was my dog... you would get the blunt end.


Yes, she is self aware but she wouldn't be high on the list of people to save.

You're making the Catalyst right, you know. Are you proud of that?

chuckles471 wrote...

Well make a list youself, I was just being honest.  You would pick EDI over a normal human? 

Depends on who the human is, of course. But both would get equal consideration.

When did I say, I'd care about people making A.I so stop exaggerating...  You might fall off your high horse.

Each time you claim that the life of a synthetic is worth less than that of an organic you're widening the organic-synthetic divide and helping to fan the flames of a potential war.

What happens when one day synthetics decide they're sick of an organic being the one who holds the hammer? What if they want a whack at deciding who lives and who dies?

Your trying to be profound...  O.K.
We have a war and hopefully we kick their heads in.  It really is that simple, we are different from them.

Do you even understand that it you understood them you would not have the war?

[dreman9999]

Iconoclaste wrote...

In fact, "property" has right, and while someone bashing his belongings to pieces will not get thrown to jail for it, he still risks a holiday in a psychiatric facility. Animals already have rights, and are protected against cruelty and neglect, among other things. We can't really give the "living" adjective to something merely "animated" that will not be guided by the same impulses as the "living". While I can understand the "attractiveness" of a sexy, walking and "wondering" computer, it's still pre-determined behavior and easily "biased" emotions. Funny thing is that the "values" of a machine will not falther before adversity : it will remain "loyal" and sacrifice itself to "defend its loved ones", where the living might just "run for their lives". That makes a funny distinction between "organics" and "synthetics" : the living have obvious "defects" and will easily be defined by their ability to act against reason...

True ...But my second Shepard grab the power lines for those synthetics.

[chuckles471]

dreman9999 wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

I just do the maths. 2 things in a room, use 1 claw hammer subtraction to equal 1.

EDI vs normal human = claw hammer in the tin can.

EDI vs normal Alien(e.g. Krogan) = circuit board hanging out of someones head.

EDI vs self destructive drug addict = Sorry EDI but he is human. You understand (she probably would).

EDI vs dog = OK you win but if it was my dog... you would get the blunt end.


Yes, she is self aware but she wouldn't be high on the list of people to save.

That is the most helarious bad reason why not to try and save EDI.

Well make a list youself, I was just being honest.  You would pick EDI over a normal human? 

EDI and a normal human =equal.

I would not pick one over the other unless it gets to the most extremes...The it would come to the issue of most useful.

You really don't get a hypothetical question, you have to pick one.  No outside circumstances, you aren't trying to escape some evil base.  Just who would you pick?  I won't jump on any answer you type, no tricks.

[SeptimusMagistos]

Iconoclaste wrote...
 it's still pre-determined behavior and easily "biased" emotions.

If you mean that a synthetic's behavior is a function of the current state of their brain and their current circumstances, this is equally true for humans.

And humans aren't really defined by having instincts. In fact, the ability to override those instincts is what separates us from other animals.

[chuckles471]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

Your trying to be profound...  O.K.
We have a war and hopefully we kick their heads in.  It really is that simple, we are different from them.

1: People who are different from you have same value as you.

2: So the Catalyst is right, then? War between synthetics and organics is inevitable?

1. I think synthetics have less value than a human.
2.  You brought up the hypothetical war, with synthetics being the aggressors.  So I said I hope we win.  At no point did I say let us start a war.  You would think your hand is up my ass, the way you put words in my mouth.

[SeptimusMagistos]

chuckles471 wrote...

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

chuckles471 wrote...

Your trying to be profound...  O.K.
We have a war and hopefully we kick their heads in.  It really is that simple, we are different from them.

1: People who are different from you have same value as you.

2: So the Catalyst is right, then? War between synthetics and organics is inevitable?

1. I think synthetics have less value than a human.
2.  You brought up the hypothetical war, with synthetics being the aggressors.  So I said I hope we win.  At no point did I say let us start a war.  You would think your hand is up my ass, the way you put words in my mouth.

1. On what basis other than that they're different from us?

2. What the Catalyst essentially said was that if put into a situation like the one you described the organics would constantly pick other organics. But that one day a synthetic would get the hammer - possibly because someone like me would give it to him because I know there are people like you - and then it would only be fair for them to judge us on the same merits we judged them. And synthetics can hammer a lot more efficiently than any human.

3. The whole thing can be avoided if we all just assign equal value to synthetics and organics.

[Iconoclaste]

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...
 it's still pre-determined behavior and easily "biased" emotions.

If you mean that a synthetic's behavior is a function of the current state of their brain and their current circumstances, this is equally true for humans.

And humans aren't really defined by having instincts. In fact, the ability to override those instincts is what separates us from other animals.

Synthetics have no "living organs". If they lose or damage some component, it can quite easily be repaired or replaced. Humans losing organs or capacity lose that for good, so they react differently to threath to a reasonable amount. Instinct still drives humans, it is just "camouflaged" by "education". Hunger still drives some people crazy, reproduction impulses are sublimed into intellectuel hyperactivity, nothing "disappears" because of "willpower", it simply recedes behind other behavior. People refraining their instincts without proper satisfactory activity develop mental problems. Synthetics can simply avoid all of that, and will never experience the drive of "survival" like organics do. They do not have "glands" activated by response to external stimuli, they do not fear for their cosmetic appearance like we do, they do not cry because there is no real "logic" behind that.

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 05 septembre 2012 - 05:21 .

[SeptimusMagistos]

Iconoclaste wrote...

SeptimusMagistos wrote...

Iconoclaste wrote...
 it's still pre-determined behavior and easily "biased" emotions.

If you mean that a synthetic's behavior is a function of the current state of their brain and their current circumstances, this is equally true for humans.

And humans aren't really defined by having instincts. In fact, the ability to override those instincts is what separates us from other animals.

Synthetics have no "living organs". If they lose or damage some component, it can quite easily be repaired or replaced. Humans losing organs or capacity lose that for good, so they react differently to threath to a reasonable amount. Instinct still drives humans, it is just "camouflaged" by "education". Hunger still drives some people crazy, reproduction impulses are sublimed into intellectuel hyperactivity, nothing "disappears" because of "willpower", it simply recedes behind other behavior. People refraining their instincts without proper satisfactory activity develop mental problems. Synthetics can simply avoid all of that, and will never experience the drive of "survival" like organics do. They do not have "glands" activated by response to external stimuly, they do not fear for their cosmetic appearance like we do, they do not cry because there is no real "logic" behind that.

I'm sure a synthetic could be programmed with emotions it could not alter - glands are as easily similated as brains are. But to what end? The capacity to experience emotions isn't what gives us our rights. If we hooked a human's glands to their conscious brain so they could alter their feelings with a conscious thought we wouldn't take away their citizenship.