Robot Slaves

I'm still not quite sure how such a concept works. Aren't they just doing what they're programmed to do?

If they are sentient/sapient, then it is slavery. That's a science fiction concept, though. An extremely complex computer is no more conscious than a toaster.

I still wonder how a machine could have a point of view of its own, though.

-ignore potential derail-

Shall I mention Futurama?

"An extremely complex computer is no more conscious than a toaster."

The brain is nothing more then an extremely complex computer.

**randomly smashes keyboard and ends up typing the following...**

You mean everything I do is just a series of nerve pulses telling me what to move and where to go?

Yes. Stupidly complicated, chaotic and nigh-unpredictable pulses sure, but it's all electrochemistry.

edited 13th Feb '11 1:29:45 PM by Yej

Also the kind that doesn't work with ones and zeroes (we don't even know what kind of coding the brain uses for storing memories), so I'm not sure if comparing it to a computer is realistic.

Aren't they just doing what they're programmed to do?

Yes.

The real problem is that the line between sentience and non-sentience, with regards to computers, is unlikely to be clear. If I were to make a complex infrastructure of different interacting AI to handle our basic resources and other functions (traffic, power grid, internet etc)... how do you tell when you go from a dynamic automated and responsive system to one that is capable of thinking? At the very edge between sentience and non-sentience it is nearly impossible to tell and humans are biased toward saying they are non-sentient. If they are sentient, religion has a problem of whether they have souls and secularists have a problem of having to afford them basic civil rights.

Sand, why can't you bring some of these lighthearted topics to YF? It's either shitposts or the freaking Spanish Inquisition calling for any thread feeling too complainy to get locked.

As for robotic slaves, I guess you're already using one to send messages right now.

If a robot develops the capacity to say "I want to do something else", then it's slavery.

inb4 printf("I want to do something else."); or some other way of completely missing the point

edited 13th Feb '11 6:18:00 PM by Pykrete

If robots develop true intelligence, and there is such a thing as a human soul, I find it entirely implausible that a robot would be unable to have a soul.

When you think about it in that context, if we're ever to create a robot that's as developed intellectually as the human brain, it really does need to have all the rights and privileges of a human being.

I don't know — I think computers would have to care one way or another about their fate before you can call them sapient, nonetheless calling them slaves. Technically, I guess you could call them slaves before that, what with the whole "having no rights and being property" thing, but you're unlikely to get me to give a shit about it.

Well, what if we genetically engineered human beings to have wiring in their brains to be happy to complacently serve in the military?

GO GO REALIANS!

edited 13th Feb '11 6:24:30 PM by TheyCallMeTomu

Here's the thing, though: the only thing any robots will have in their "heads" is what we put there. So, for a robot to be a slave, the person making it would have to choose to give it the capacity to feel it is in bondage.

And even if they did, so what? Are you really going to get bent out of shape about the facsimile of a feeling implanted in an inanimate mass of metal and wires?

In fact, why not order one? Available now from Wanderhome Cybernetitech, LLC for the low, low price of $2499.99!

Can't afford one right now? Ask one of our dedicated Sales Bots(TM) about our rent-to-own policy.

Act now, while supplies last!

EDIT: Except then you'd be unethically manipulating a person who already has rights, and it would be pointless anyway. There are already plenty of people who don't need to have their thinking hardware rearranged to join the military.

edited 13th Feb '11 6:31:25 PM by Wanderhome

Removing the ability to care doesn't count. Just because you make someone a vegetable doesn't mean you get to keep them as property.

… Why do I feel like I'm entering into a really complicated string of logical fall out by saying that? Curse you, internet debates!

No no, you're breeding human beings in scientific labs from scratch. You're not imposing on anyone's will.

Basically, the only way to say a robot has less rights than a human is to treat it as some kind of arbitrary spiritual decree.

^It should be my right to genetically engineer brainless human tissue that is sustained not by a central nervous system, but by a series of machines that supports the nervous system necessary to power the heart, lungs, and liver!

edited 13th Feb '11 6:34:31 PM by TheyCallMeTomu

"Removing the ability to care doesn't count. Just because you make someone a vegetable doesn't mean you get to keep them as property."

Not analagous at all. In that case, I'd have to reduce the mental capacity of another human being against their will to get to the "pliable servant" stage, which means violating someone's rights.

In the case of an automaton, it would just be a matter of taking a bit of machinery and giving it a computer advanced enough to carry out varied complex tasks with minimal need for detailed instructions, while stopping short of trying to replicate human feelings in it.

Hell, replicating actual emotions in a robot would take a lot of effort in addition to that needed to make them "smart" enough to serve, while providing no extra benefit.

...

That's what zombies are for! D:<

Then again, zombies would probably eat you first.

Hello? Genetically engineering-with future tech obviously-humans from scratch. That's the analogy!

What if they were born that way?

Exactly: the idea is of an entity that has no existence prior to a desire towards servitude. No one needs to break the analogy with saying that we're taking existing fully grown humans and re-programming them. That's not the analogy.

No no, you're breeding human beings in scientific labs from scratch. You're not imposing on anyone's will.

Removing the current unethically behind doing that already, that's probably not what would happen. Mainly because, to get there, you're going to have to violate the rights of a lot of test subjects first.

Also, I didn't say they have to care about being slaves first, but have to care about their fate in general, which isn't the same thing. You don't have to yearn to be free to hope that a faulty part will be replaced soon. The idea you presented isn't that the genetically modified humans wouldn't care, but that they are made to care about the right things to prefer to be what they where made to be.

edited 13th Feb '11 6:50:04 PM by Dec

Let's just assume that I AM GOD INCARNATE and can snap my fingers to create human beings with personalities predetermined by me.

How we get there is inconsequential and basically a red herring-it's not part of the analogy.

>:(

**shoots Tomu**

This is about robots!